An Analysis of Clean Water Act Compliance, July 2003- December 2004

March 2006

An analysis of Clean Water Act compliance, July 2003- December 2004

Troubled Waters

An analysis of Clean Water Act compliance, July 2003- December 2004

March 2006

Troubled Waters i

Acknowledgments

Written by Christy Leavitt, Clean Water Advocate with Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center.

Cover photo: Photodisc.

The author would like to thank Alison Cassady, Research Director with Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center, for her editorial assistance and contributions to this report. Additional thanks to the numerous staff at state environmental protection agencies across the country for reviewing the data for accuracy.

The recommendations are those of the Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders.

To obtain additional copies of this report, visit our website or send a check for $25 made payable to Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center at the following address:

Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center 1536 Wynkoop Street, Suite 100 Denver, CO 80202 (303) 573-3871 www.environmentcolorado.org

Troubled Waters ii

Table of Contents

Executive Summary 1

Introduction: The State of America’s Waters 3

Background: A Permit to Pollute 4

Findings: America’s Troubled Waterways 7

The Bush Administration’s Assault on the Clean Water Act 14

Recommendations 17

Methodology 20

Appendix A. Facilities Exceeding Their Clean Water Act Permits for at Least 9 of the 18 Reporting Periods between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004 22

Appendix B. All Colorado Facilities Exceeding their Clean Water Act Permits at Least Once between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004 32

Troubled Waters iii Executive Summary

hen drafting the Clean Water Act in 1972, legislators set the goals of making all U.S. waterways Wfishable and swimmable by 1983 and eliminating the discharge of pollutants into the nation’s waterways by 1985. More than 30 years later, we are far from realizing the Clean Water Act’s original vision.

Using information provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, this report analyzes all major facilitiesa violating their Clean Water Act permits between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004, reveals the type of pollutants they are discharging into our waterways, and details the extent to which these facilities are exceeding their permit levels.

More than two decades after the drafters of the Clean Water Act hoped that all waterways would be pollution-free, we find that facilities across the country continue to discharge more pollution into our waterways than allowed under the law.

Key findings include:

Thousands of facilities continue to exceed their Clean Water Act permits.

Nationally, more than 3,700 major facilities (62%) exceeded their Clean Water Act permit limits at least once between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004.

The ten U.S. states that allowed the highest percentage of major facilities to exceed their Clean Water Act permit limits at least once are West Virginia, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Iowa, Ohio, New Hampshire, Utah, the District of Columbia, and Maine.

The eight U.S. counties with the most facilities exceeding their Clean Water Act permits at least once in this period are Harris County, Texas; Worcester County, Massachusetts; New Haven County, Connecticut; Allegheny County, Pennsylvania; Hartford County, Connecticut; Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana; Erie County, New York; and Fairfield County, Connecticut.

These facilities often exceed their permits more than once and for more than one pollutant.

Nationally, 436 major facilities exceeded their Clean Water Act permit limits for at least half of the monthly reporting periods between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004.

Thirty-five (35) facilities exceeded their Clean Water Act permits during every monthly reporting period between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004.

a Facilities are designated as “major” based on an EPA scoring system that considers a combination of factors, including toxic pollutant potential, streamflow volume, public health impacts, and proximity to coastal waters.

Troubled Waters 1 The 3,700 major facilities exceeding their permits in the time period studied reported more than 29,000 exceedances of their Clean Water Act permit limits. This means that many facilities exceeded their permits more than once and for more than one pollutant.

The ten U.S. states that allowed the most exceedances of Clean Water Act permit limits between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004 are Ohio, Texas, New York, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Tennessee, Indiana, West Virginia, Massachusetts, and Illinois.

These facilities often exceed their permits egregiously.

Major facilities exceeding their Clean Water Act permits, on average, exceeded their permit limits by about 275%, or almost four times the allowed amount.

The ten U.S. states that allowed the highest average permit exceedance between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004 are Hawaii, Wyoming, South Dakota, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Indiana, Mississippi, Delaware, Illinois, and Georgia.

Nationally, major facilities reported approximately 2,500 instances between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004 in which they exceeded their Clean Water Act permit limits by at least six-fold (500%).

The U.S. states that allowed at least 100 exceedances of at least 500% are Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania, New York, Tennessee, Texas, and Massachusetts.

At a time when our federal leaders should be working with the states to clean up our waterways and enforce the law, the Bush administration has suggested, proposed, or enacted numerous policies that would weaken the Clean Water Act and threaten the future of America’s rivers, lakes, streams, wetlands, and oceans. Rather than weakening the Clean Water Act, the Bush administration and our elected officials should tighten enforcement of Clean Water Act programs; strengthen standards to protect our rivers, lakes, streams, wetlands, and coastal waters; and ensure the public’s right to know about water pollution by increasing and improving access to accurate and comprehensive compliance data and discharge reporting.

Troubled Waters 2

Introduction: The State of America’s Waters

n 1972, Congress passed the Clean Water Act, marking a distinct change in the direction of water Ipollution control. The Clean Water Act maintained the requirements for water quality-based controls but added an equal emphasis on technology-based, or end-of-pipe, control strategies. The Act set several goals, stating “it is the national goal that the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters be eliminated by 1985”; “it is the national goal that wherever attainable an interim goal of water quality which provides for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and provides for recreation in and on the water be achieved by July 1, 1983”; and “it is the national policy that the discharge of toxic pollutants in toxic amounts be prohibited.”1

Three decades later, although the Clean Water Act has helped to clean up the nation’s waterways, we have not yet achieved these goals. Consider the following:

A majority of Americans live within 10 miles of a polluted river, lake, stream, or coastal area.2

Approximately 39% of our rivers, 46% of our lakes, and 51% of our estuaries are impaired for one or more uses and thus still too polluted for safe fishing or swimming.3

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that more than 20,000 bodies of water throughout the country are too polluted to meet basic water quality standards.4

In March 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) released a report describing the occurrence of pesticides in streams and groundwater over the ten years spanning 1992-2001. USGS found at least one pesticide in all of the streams studied.5

Across the country, pollution caused nearly 20,000 beach closings and advisories in 2004 at ocean, bay, and Great Lakes surveyed beaches, the highest level in 15 years.6

In 2004, 31 states had statewide fish consumption advisories in place because of toxic pollution. Federal or state agencies have issued fish consumption advisories for 35% of the nation’s total lake acres (excluding the Great Lakes), all of the Great Lakes, 24% of total river miles, and nearly 65% of the country’s contiguous coastal waters, including 92% of the Atlantic coast and the entire Gulf coast.7

According to EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory, polluters discharged more than 221.8 million pounds of toxic chemicals into our waterways in 2003 alone.8

At least 853 billion gallons of raw sewage are dumped into U.S. waterways every year.9 U.S. sewer systems are aging; by 2025, sewage pollution will reach the highest levels in U.S. history without significant investment in wastewater treatment infrastructure.10

America’s waterways are an important part of our natural heritage, providing us with drinking water and places to swim and fish. Over the last 30 years, we have made significant strides in cleaning up our waterways, but we still have important work to do. Today, many of America’s iconic waterways, from the Mississippi River to the Chesapeake Bay to the Great Lakes, are struggling with pollution. The “fishable and swimmable” goal of the Clean Water Act remains the unmet benchmark of water quality in the U.S.

Troubled Waters 3

Background: A Permit to Pollute

n addition to setting the goals of eliminating the discharge of pollution into America’s waterways and Imaking all waterways fishable and swimmable, the Clean Water Act embodies four important principles:11

• The discharge of pollutants to navigable waters is not a right.

A discharge permit is required to use public resources for waste disposal and limits the amount of pollutants that may be discharged.

Wastewater must be treated with the best treatment technology economically achievable, regardless of the condition of the receiving water.

Effluent limits must be based on treatment technology performance, but more stringent limits may be imposed if the technology-based limits do not prevent violations of water quality standards in the receiving water.

The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

As authorized by the Clean Water Act, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program regulates point sources that discharge pollutants into waters of the United States. The Clean Water Act prohibits any facility from discharging pollutants from a point source into a waterway unless it has a NPDES permit. The permit contains limits on what the facility can discharge and monitoring and reporting requirements. The permit provides two levels of control: technology-based limits, based on the ability of dischargers to treat wastewater, and water quality-based limits, if technology-based limits are not enough to protect the water body.12

Pollutants enter waterways from agricultural, domestic, industrial, and other sources. For regulatory purposes, these sources are categorized as either point sources or non-point sources. Point sources refer to discharges that enter waterways from individual pipes or other identifiable locations, such as discharges from sewage treatment plants and industrial facilities. Non-point source pollution, unlike pollution from industrial and sewage treatment plants, comes from many diffuse sources and is caused by rainfall or snowmelt that picks up pollutants and deposits them into lakes, rivers, wetlands, and coastal waters.

Water pollution may come from both direct and indirect sources. Direct sources discharge wastewater directly into waterways, whereas indirect sources discharge wastewater to a sewage treatment plant, which in turn discharges directly into the receiving water body. NPDES permits are issued only to direct point source dischargers. Indirect dischargers—industrial and commercial facilities that discharge into sewage treatment works—are regulated by the National Pretreatment Program.

The NPDES permitting program is mainly geared toward the regulation of municipal and non-municipal (industrial) direct dischargers. Municipal sources are sewage treatment plants that receive primarily domestic sewage from residential and commercial customers. Larger sewage treatment plants also usually treat wastewater from industrial facilities (indirect dischargers) connected to the sewage system. Many

Troubled Waters 4 industrial and commercial facilities also discharge into the waterways of the United States. According to the U.S. EPA NPDES Permit Writers’ Manual, “at industrial facilities the types of raw materials, production processes, treatment technologies utilized, and pollutants discharged vary widely and are dependent on the type of industry and specific facility characteristics.”13

Roles and Responsibilities of Federal and State Authorities

EPA is authorized under the Clean Water Act to implement and enforce the NPDES program. However, EPA can authorize those states that request permission to implement all or part of the NPDES program.

In order for states to receive authorization to implement the NPDES program, they must first establish the necessary legal framework and institutions. This authority is subject to conditions and can be revoked by EPA. States that want to administer the NPDES program submit a letter to EPA from the governor requesting review and approval, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), a Program Description, a Statement of Legal Authority (also known as an “Attorney General’s Statement” or “AG Statement”), and the underlying state laws and regulations.

In general, once a state is authorized to administer a part of the NPDES program, EPA no longer conducts these activities. EPA still maintains an oversight role and retains the right to take enforcement action against violators if the state fails to do so. Additionally, EPA retains the right to review each permit issued by the state and may formally object to elements that conflict with federal requirements. If the permitting agency does not address the objection points, EPA will issue the permit directly.

In states without an authorized NPDES program, EPA administers the NPDES program through EPA regional offices, with help from the respective state environmental agencies. Currently, the only states without an approved NPDES program are Alaska, the District of Columbia, Idaho, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and New Mexico.14 When EPA issues the permit, the Clean Water Act requires that EPA obtain certification from the state of where the discharge will occur to ensure that the discharge will be in compliance with effluent limits, the state’s water quality standards, and “any other appropriate requirement of state law.”15

Once a permit is issued through a government agency, the approved state and federal agencies (including EPA) have legal authority to implement and enforce the permit.

Troubled Waters 5

Shortcomings of EPA’s Permit Compliance System

U.S. EPA maintains the Permit Compliance System (PCS) database, which is designed to track permit, compliance and enforcement status data for the NPDES program under the Clean Water Act. Unfortunately, this critical tool that houses information about the nation’s enforcement of the Clean Water Act is outdated and flawed in a few ways, although this remains the best available public data on water quality in the United States.

The PCS database had its last major revision in 1982 and has been identified as an agency weakness publicly since 1999. In a 2003 report, EPA’s Office of the Inspector General stated that the EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) “has directed insufficient attention to conducting accurate and timely planning and analysis” for a planned modernization of the PCS database. The report said that “OECA has not completed certain required planning documents whose preparation might have improved the management of the program.”16 In 2003, the agency, which had promised to modernize the system by the end of the year, admitted that the PCS upgrade would not be complete until September 2006. The Inspector General criticized EPA for allowing the date to slip, noting that without a modernized PCS system, “EPA’s Office of Water cannot effectively manage its Clean Water NPDES program.”17 In 2005, the Government Accountability Office reported that the PCS database modernization would be phased in beginning in 2006.18

Available data on water quality in the U.S. at best paints an incomplete picture of the pollution entering our waterways; at worst, it is a gross underestimate. EPA only requires states to enter data for “major” facilities into its database, covering just a small subset of the universe of facilities. Facilities are designated as “major” based on an EPA scoring system that considers a combination of factors, including toxic pollutant potential, streamflow volume, public health impacts, and proximity to coastal waters. Little compliance information regarding hundreds of thousands of additional dischargers with NPDES permits is available to the public, or in some cases even available at all.19 According to the EPA Inspector General, cost concerns are the reason that EPA does not require states to enter data from “minor” facilities into the system.

Moreover, in the course of completing this report, we identified several areas in which the current PCS database system falls short. EPA informed us that the data for California, Oregon, and Washington was incomplete and unreliable. EPA and the states often record discharges in different units—in pounds instead of kilograms, or milligrams instead of micrograms—which can cause unnecessary mathematical errors. Finally, the permit data for facilities is not always up-to-date. EPA and the states should commit to finishing the PCS modernization and fixing these and other problems as soon as possible.

Troubled Waters 6

Findings: America’s Troubled Waterways

wo decades after the drafters of the Clean Water Act hoped to eliminate the discharge of pollution into Tour waterways, we find that facilities across the country continue to discharge more pollution into our waterways than allowed under the law.

In response to a Freedom of Information Act request, EPA provided us with summary data about active major facilitiesb in the Clean Water Act’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). All information was generated from the Permit Compliance System (PCS) and Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA) system and covers the time period spanning July 1, 2003 through December 31, 2004. Refer to the methodology section for more details about this data.

Key findings include:

Thousands of facilities continue to exceed their Clean Water Act permits.

Nationally, more than 3,700 major facilities (62%) exceeded their Clean Water Act permit limits at least once between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004.

These facilities often exceed their permits more than once and for more than one pollutant.

The 3,700 major facilities exceeding their permits in the time period studied reported more than 29,000 exceedances of their Clean Water Act permit limits. This means that many facilities exceeded their permits more than once and for more than one pollutant.

The ten U.S. states that allowed the most exceedances of Clean Water Act permit limits during this time period are Ohio, Texas, New York, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Tennessee, Indiana, West Virginia, Massachusetts, and Illinois.

b Facilities are designated as “major” based on an EPA scoring system that considers a combination of factors, including toxic pollutant potential, streamflow volume, public health impacts, and proximity to coastal waters.

Troubled Waters 7 These facilities often exceed their permits egregiously.

Major facilities exceeding their Clean Water Act permits, on average, exceeded their permit limits by about 275%, or almost four times the allowed amount.

The ten U.S. states that allowed the highest average permit exceedance in the time period studied are Hawaii, Wyoming, South Dakota, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Indiana, Mississippi, Delaware, Illinois, and Georgia.

Nationally, major facilities reported approximately 2,500 instances between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004 in which they exceeded their Clean Water Act permit limits by at least six-fold (500%).

The U.S. states that allowed at least 100 exceedances of at least 500% are Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania, New York, Tennessee, Texas, and Massachusetts.

Water Quality Permitting: Quantity vs. Concentration

A facility’s NPDES permit can contain several different discharge limits for each parameter (pollutant), depending on the permit writer and parameter regulated. The permit limits generally fall within two categories: quantity and concentration.

Quantity refers to the mass of a pollutant discharged into a waterway and most commonly is measured in kilograms per day or pounds per day. A NPDES permit may set a quantity average that the facility may not exceed for a specified parameter. Quantity average refers to the quantity of a pollutant discharged averaged over the reporting period, which may be a week, month, quarter, etc., depending on the permit writer and the parameter.

Similarly, a permit may set a quantity maximum that the facility may not exceed for a specified parameter. Quantity maximum refers to the highest quantity of a pollutant recorded over a set time during the reporting period. The logic is that, for some pollutants, if an entire month’s allowable amount was discharged all in one day, a waterbody might be severely damaged.

Concentration refers to the mass of a pollutant in a given volume of water, generally measured as milligrams per liter or parts per million. A NPDES permit may set a concentration average that the facility may not exceed for a specified parameter. Concentration average refers to the concentration of a pollutant discharged averaged over the reporting period.

Similarly, a permit may set a concentration maximum that the facility may not exceed for a specified parameter. Concentration maximum refers to the highest concentration of a pollutant recorded over a set time during the reporting period. In addition, a NPDES permit may set a concentration minimum that the facility may not fall below for a specified parameter. This permit requirement is rare and applies to parameters such as dissolved oxygen.

Troubled Waters 8 FINDING: Thousands of facilities continue to exceed their Clean Water Act permits.

Nationally, more than 3,700 major facilities (62%) exceeded their Clean Water Act permit limits at least once between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004. The ten U.S. states that allowed the highest percentage of major facilities to exceed their Clean Water Act permit limits at least once are West Virginia, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Iowa, Ohio, New Hampshire, Utah, the District of Columbia, and Maine (Table 1). Between 74 and 80 percent of the facilities in these states exceeded their permits at least once in the time period studied.

Table 1. Number and Percentage of Major Facilities Exceeding their Clean Water Act Permit Limits at Least Once between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004: By State

Total # Exceeding % of Total # Exceeding % of Major Permit at Major Major Permit at Major Rank State Facilities Least Once Facilities Rank State Facilities Least Once Facilities 1 West Virginia 98 79 80.6% 26 South Carolina 173 107 61.8% 2 Rhode Island 25 20 80.0% 27 Georgia 169 102 60.4% 3 Connecticut 108 86 79.6% 28 Kansas 55 33 60.0% 4 New York 344 271 78.8% 28 Wyoming 25 15 60.0% 5 Iowa 128 100 78.1% 30 Texas 596 348 58.4% 6 Ohio 292 228 78.1% 31 Alaska 43 25 58.1% 7 New Hampshire 58 45 77.6% 32 Pennsylvania 383 221 57.7% 8 Utah 33 25 75.8% 33 Illinois 276 158 57.2% 9 District of Columbia 4 3 75.0% 34 Arkansas 103 57 55.3% 10 Maine 87 65 74.7% 35 New Mexico 33 18 54.5% 11 Massachusetts 130 95 73.1% 35 Vermont 33 18 54.5% 12 Missouri 144 104 72.2% 37 Michigan 190 103 54.2% 13 Delaware 21 15 71.4% 38 Colorado 107 52 48.6% 14 Indiana 194 134 69.1% 39 Hawaii 22 10 45.5% 15 Oklahoma 86 59 68.6% 40 Arizona 54 24 44.4% 16 Alabama 194 132 68.0% 40 South Dakota 27 12 44.4% 17 Louisiana 242 163 67.4% 42 Wisconsin 129 55 42.6% 18 Idaho 36 24 66.7% 43 Maryland 97 41 42.3% 18 Nebraska 54 36 66.7% 44 New Jersey 155 63 40.6% 20 North Dakota 26 17 65.4% 45 Minnesota 89 35 39.3% 21 Kentucky 138 88 63.8% 46 Virginia 143 51 35.7% 22 Mississippi 88 56 63.6% 47 Montana 40 14 35.0% 23 Tennessee 155 98 63.2% 48 Nevada 13 3 23.1% 24 North Carolina 223 140 62.8% 25 Florida 214 134 62.6% TOTAL 6,077 3,782 62%

Note: We excluded California, Oregon and Washington because the states failed to provide reliable data to EPA.

Troubled Waters 9

FINDING: Some U.S. counties are home to multiple facilities that exceed their Clean Water Act permits.

Eight U.S. counties are home to at least 17 major facilities that exceeded their Clean Water Act permits at least once during the time period studied. These counties include Harris County, Texas; Worcester County, Massachusetts; New Haven County, Connecticut; Allegheny County, Pennsylvania; Hartford County, Connecticut; Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana; Erie County, New York; and Fairfield County, Connecticut. See Table 2 for a list of the counties with at least 10 facilities exceeding their Clean Water Act permits at least once between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004.

Table 2. Counties with the Most Major Facilities Exceeding their Clean Water Act Permit Limits at Least Once between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004

# # Exceeding Exceeding Total Permit at % of Total Permit at % of Major Least Major Major Least Major Rank State County Name Facilities Once Facilities Rank State County Name Facilities Once Facilities 1 Texas Harris 168 99 58.9% 25 Indiana Lake 18 12 66.7% 2 Massachusetts Worcester 27 24 88.9% 25 Louisiana Ascension 17 12 70.6% 3 Connecticut New Haven 25 21 84.0% 25 Maine York 87 12 13.8% 4 Pennsylvania Allegheny 33 19 57.6% 25 Massachusetts Essex 14 12 85.7% 5 Connecticut Hartford 23 18 78.3% 25 Massachusetts Middlesex 15 12 80.0% 5 Louisiana Calcasieu 26 18 69.2% 25 New York Orange 13 12 92.3% 5 New York Erie 21 18 85.7% 25 Ohio Ashtabula 13 12 92.3% 8 Connecticut Fairfield 19 17 89.5% 32 Alabama Jefferson 19 11 57.9% 9 Louisiana E. Baton Rouge 23 16 69.6% 32 Illinois Lake 20 11 55.0% 9 Pennsylvania Beaver 23 16 69.6% 32 Maine Aroostook 12 11 91.7% 9 Texas Nueces 24 16 66.7% 32 New Jersey Burlington 22 11 50.0% 9 West Virginia Kanawha 21 16 76.2% 32 New York Oswego 12 11 91.7% 13 Alabama Mobile 19 15 78.9% 32 New York Saint Lawrence 13 11 84.6% 13 New York Niagara 17 15 88.2% 32 Pennsylvania Bucks 12 11 91.7% 15 Florida Hillsborough 19 14 73.7% 32 South Carolina Anderson 14 11 78.6% 15 Florida Polk 23 14 60.9% 40 Connecticut New London 14 10 71.4% 15 Illinois DuPage 24 14 58.3% 40 Maine Cumberland 13 10 76.9% 15 Michigan Wayne 20 14 70.0% 40 Massachusetts Bristol 17 10 58.8% 15 Texas Brazoria 19 14 73.7% 40 Massachusetts Plymouth 12 10 83.3% 20 Florida Duval 20 13 65.0% 40 New Hampshire Rockingham 14 10 71.4% 20 Illinois Will 26 13 50.0% 40 New York Nassau 14 10 71.4% 20 Pennsylvania Montgomery 23 13 56.5% 40 Pennsylvania Westmoreland 16 10 62.5% 20 Texas Fort Bend 24 13 54.2% 40 Texas Galveston 15 10 66.7% 20 Texas Jefferson 17 13 76.5%

Troubled Waters 10 FINDING: These facilities often exceed their permits more than once and for more than one pollutant.

Nationally, 436 major facilities exceeded their Clean Water Act permit limits for at least half (9 of the 18) monthly reporting periods between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004. (See Appendix A for a list of these facilities.) Thirty-five (35) facilities exceeded their Clean Water Act permits during every monthly reporting period. In addition, the 3,700 major facilities exceeding their permits in the time period studied reported more than 29,000 exceedances of their Clean Water Act permit limits. This means that many facilities exceeded their permits more than once and for more than one pollutant. The ten U.S. states that allowed the most exceedances of Clean Water Act permit limits during this time period are Ohio, Texas, New York, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Tennessee, Indiana, West Virginia, Massachusetts, and Illinois (Table 3).

Table 3. Number of Exceedances of Permit Limits between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004: By State

Total Total Rank State Exceedances Rank State Exceedances 1 Ohio 2,656 26 Rhode Island 301 2 Texas 2,043 27 New Jersey 279 3 New York 2,014 28 Nebraska 277 4 Pennsylvania 1,993 29 Virginia 267 5 Louisiana 1,366 30 Alaska 252 6 Tennessee 1,292 31 Idaho 236 7 Indiana 1,180 32 Maryland 230 8 West Virginia 1,130 33 Arizona 217 9 Massachusetts 1,129 34 New Mexico 196 10 Illinois 1,072 35 Minnesota 169 11 Alabama 1,004 36 Colorado 165 12 Florida 893 37 Hawaii 164 13 Iowa 775 38 Delaware 147 14 North Carolina 769 39 Utah 144 15 Georgia 692 40 Wisconsin 130 16 Missouri 652 41 Kansas 129 17 Mississippi 651 42 Vermont 100 18 Kentucky 601 43 North Dakota 86 19 Connecticut 599 44 South Dakota 77 20 Arkansas 577 45 Wyoming 62 21 South Carolina 567 46 Montana 58 22 Maine 461 47 District of Columbia 22 23 Oklahoma 446 48 Nevada 10 24 New Hampshire 390 25 Michigan 380 National 29,050

Note: We excluded California, Oregon and Washington because the states failed to provide reliable data to EPA.

Troubled Waters 11 FINDING: These facilities often exceed their permits egregiously.

Major facilities exceeding their Clean Water Act permits, on average, exceeded their permit limits by about 275%, or almost four times the allowed amount. The ten U.S. states that allowed the highest average permit exceedance between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004 are Hawaii, Wyoming, South Dakota, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Indiana, Mississippi, Delaware, Illinois, and Georgia (Table 4).

Nationally, major facilities reported approximately 2,500 instances between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004 in which they exceeded their Clean Water Act permit limits by at least six-fold (500%). The U.S. states that allowed at least 100 exceedances of at least 500% are Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania, New York, Tennessee, Texas, and Massachusetts (Table 5).

Table 4. Average Exceedance of Clean Water Act Permit Limits between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004: By State

Average Average Exceedance Exceedance (% over Permit (% over Permit Rank State Limit) Rank State Limit) 1 Hawaii 2616.2% 26 New Jersey 193.9% 2 Wyoming 1331.0% 27 North Carolina 191.0% 3 South Dakota 1193.7% 28 Iowa 181.4% 4 New Mexico 950.7% 29 Maryland 174.6% 5 Oklahoma 785.6% 30 South Carolina 164.9% 6 Indiana 530.5% 31 Florida 163.7% 7 Mississippi 486.4% 32 Pennsylvania 153.7% 8 Delaware 466.1% 33 Kentucky 153.4% 9 Illinois 462.0% 34 New York 150.0% 10 Georgia 427.6% 35 Alaska 145.3% 11 Missouri 414.5% 36 Louisiana 136.5% 12 Vermont 395.6% 37 Arizona 136.0% 13 New Hampshire 385.4% 38 Texas 133.8% 14 Kansas 341.7% 39 Wisconsin 125.2% 15 Michigan 336.7% 40 Minnesota 121.1% 16 West Virginia 329.2% 41 Idaho 114.6% 17 Arkansas 285.9% 42 Rhode Island 109.4% 18 Nebraska 284.6% 43 Connecticut 103.4% 19 Massachusetts 259.7% 44 Montana 83.4% 20 Tennessee 249.6% 45 North Dakota 58.6% 21 Maine 246.8% 46 Utah 55.4% 22 Virginia 232.4% 47 District of Columbia 52.4% 23 Alabama 222.9% 48 Nevada 39.7% 24 Colorado 213.2% 25 Ohio 196.0% National Average 275%

Note: We excluded California, Oregon and Washington because the states failed to provide reliable data to EPA.

Troubled Waters 12 Table 5. Number of Exceedances of Permit Limits of at Least 500% (Sixfold) between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004: By State

# of # of exceedances exceedances Rank State >500% Rank State >500% 1 Ohio 205 24 Kentucky 40 2 Indiana 178 25 South Carolina 36 3 Pennsylvania 154 26 Michigan 33 4 New York 141 26 Nebraska 33 5 Tennessee 118 28 New Jersey 32 6 Texas 115 29 Virginia 29 7 Massachusetts 113 30 Connecticut 28 8 Alabama 96 31 Alaska 25 8 Mississippi 96 32 Rhode Island 21 10 Illinois 94 33 Colorado 16 11 West Virginia 85 34 Idaho 15 12 Louisiana 80 35 Maryland 14 13 Georgia 75 36 South Dakota 13 14 North Carolina 71 36 Wyoming 13 15 Oklahoma 66 38 Arizona 12 16 New Mexico 65 38 Delaware 12 17 Missouri 64 38 Vermont 12 18 Arkansas 63 41 Minnesota 6 18 New Hampshire 63 42 Kansas 5 20 Florida 60 43 Wisconsin 4 21 Hawaii 58 44 Utah 2 21 Maine 58 45 Montana 1 23 Iowa 57 National 2,577

Note: We excluded California, Oregon and Washington because the states failed to provide reliable data to EPA. Nevada and North Dakota did not report any exceedances over 500%.

Troubled Waters 13

The Bush Administration’s Assault on the Clean Water Act

t a time when federal officials should be working with the states to improve water quality and enforce Athe Clean Water Act, the Bush administration has suggested, proposed, or enacted numerous policies that would weaken the Clean Water Act and threaten the future of America’s waterways.

Allowing More Pollution in Waterways

In January 2003, the Bush administration put in a place a policy directive that eliminates Clean Water Act protections for many small streams, wetlands, ponds and other waters. These small streams and wetlands feed and clean larger rivers, lakes and bays by providing water, filtering out pollution, controlling flood waters and providing habitat for fish and other wildlife.20 Pollution entering these source waters will affect the quality of waters downstream.21

The policy directive instructs U.S. EPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers staff to stop implementing Clean Water Act protections for many waters and requires field staff to withhold protections unless they receive permission from Army Corps or EPA headquarters. This policy puts thousands of miles of streams and millions of acres of wetlands at risk of unlimited pollution and development. EPA has acknowledged that the policy could remove protections from 20 million acres of wetlands alone, or about 20% of the wetlands in the lower 48 states.22

In December 2003, EPA announced that it would not go forward with a proposed rulemaking to redefine many wetlands, streams, and other waters “out” of the Clean Water Act;23 however, the policy directing EPA and Army Corps staff remains in place. This policy has allowed developers, mining companies, and other polluters seeking exemption from the Clean Water Act to argue that wetlands, small streams, ponds or other waters fall outside of the Clean Water Act’s jurisdiction. The Army Corps’ own reporting shows that thousands of waters around the country have already lost protection as a result of this policy.24

Threatening Public Health

Sewage “Blending” On November 7, 2003, the Bush administration issued a draft policy guidance that relaxes restrictions on sewage treatment facilities for discharging inadequately treated sewage into waterways when it rains. The proposal would allow sewage treatment facilities to divert sewage around secondary treatment units and then combine the filtered but untreated sewage with fully treated wastewater before discharging it into waterways, in a process called “blending.” The effect of this sewage blending would be to remove the crucial second step in the process of sewage treatment during wet weather, specifically the biological treatment of the sewage. Currently, this sort of bypass is prohibited.25

Sewage contains bacteria, viruses, parasites, helminthes (intestinal worms), and a host of other organisms that cause beach closings, kill fish and harm public health. Sewage-contaminated waters can cause illness ranging from nausea and diarrhea to cholera, dysentery, infectious hepatitis, and severe gastroenteritis.26 Because the biological treatment component of the process removes most of the pathogens from the

Troubled Waters 14 wastewater, blended sewage has significantly higher levels of these pollutants than sewage that has undergone full treatment.27 Sewage blending could lead to more beach closings, increased drinking water treatment costs, shellfish bed closures, fish kills and more illnesses from waterborne diseases.

As a result of significant public and congressional opposition to the sewage blending policy, the Bush administration withdrew the policy on May 19, 2005, just hours before the U.S. House of Representatives voted to block EPA from finalizing it.

Sewer Overflows In January 2001, EPA proposed to clarify and expand permit requirements for 19,000 municipal sanitary sewer collection systems in order to reduce sewer overflows. Sanitary sewers carry wastes from buildings to sewage treatment plants. When these sewers are overloaded, inadequately maintained or obstructed, they often overflow, dumping raw and inadequately treated sewage into basements, streets, and waterways. EPA estimates that at least 40,000 sanitary sewer overflows occur nationally each year.28

The proposed Sanitary Sewer Overflow Rule, the product of a federal advisory committee that met for five years, would help communities improve some sanitary sewer systems by requiring facilities to develop and implement new capacity, management, operations, maintenance, and public notification programs.29 This rule would, among other things, require sewer operators to monitor sewers and notify health authorities and the public when overflows could potentially harm public health. The Bush administration has blocked these regulations ever it assumed office.

Undercutting Enforcement and Protection

Budget cutbacks threaten EPA’s abilities to effectively police polluters and protect the nation’s waters. The Bush administration’s Fiscal Year 2007 proposed budget would cut funding for EPA by more than $300 million, four percent below this year’s funding level. Including this current budget proposal, the Bush administration has cut EPA’s budget by more than $1 billion over the last three years.

The continued cuts to EPA’s budget prevent the agency from putting more environmental cops on the beat and limit the number of inspections to detect violations of the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act and other key environmental laws. The Bush administration’s poor track record on environmental enforcement during its first term is well-documented. A December 2003 Knight Ridder analysis of 15 years of environmental enforcement records found that the Bush administration in its first three years caught and punished far fewer polluters than the two previous administrations.30 Knight Ridder examined EPA data in 17 categories and subcategories of civil enforcement since January 1989 and compared the records of the past three administrations. In 13 of those 17 categories, the Bush administration had lower average numbers than the Clinton administration. And in 11 of those categories, the 2003 average was lower than the 2001 average, showing the trend increasing over time.

The monthly average of violation notices against polluters, a critical enforcement tool, dropped 58% compared with the Clinton administration’s monthly average; notices of water pollution violations were down 74%. The study also found that administrative fines were down 28%, when adjusted for inflation, from Clinton administration levels. Civil penalties averaged 6% less, when adjusted for inflation. And the number of cases referred to the Justice Department for prosecution was down 5%.31 No similar studies have been done to examine the administration’s enforcement record since 2003.

Troubled Waters 15 The president’s proposed budget also cuts funding for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) by $199 million, a 22% decrease from funding levels in 2006. The Clean Water SRF provides low interest loans to communities to upgrade wastewater treatment systems and other water projects. This is the largest cut to any EPA program, representing a cut of nearly 50 percent from funding levels just three years ago. EPA projects that U.S. communities will have to spend at least $388 billion over the next 20 years to address problems with the nation’s water infrastructure, yet the administration continues to cut federal funding for these needed upgrades.32

In addition, the president’s budget cuts funding for programs to clean up the Great Lakes. In December 2005, President Bush’s task force, the Great Lakes Regional Collaborative, announced its plan to restore the Great Lakes. The plan calls for $20 billion to stop sewage pollution, clean up the most polluted areas of the lakes, protect wetlands, and prevent invasive species from entering the lakes. Despite the task force’s recommendations, the president’s proposed budget cuts $2 million from the Great Lakes Fisheries Commission, which works to control invasive species that harm the region’s fishery, and $1 million from the Great Lakes Program Office, the office responsible for implementing the Great Lakes Regional Collaborative plan. The president’s cuts to the Clean Water SRF also hurt the Great Lakes by reducing the funding needed to address the source of sewage pollution.

Other Rollbacks to the Clean Water Act

The Bush administration has proposed or enacted numerous other policies to chip away at Clean Water Act protections, including:

In January 2006, the Bush administration proposed exempting sediment runoff at oil and gas construction sites from regulation under the Clean Water Act.33 Sediment increases drinking water treatment costs and harms fish.

In February 2005, the Bush administration proposed a rule to exclude pesticides from regulation under the Clean Water Act and allow pesticides to be discharged into rivers, lakes, streams, and other waters without a permit.34

In January 2004, the Bush administration, in a benefit to the coal-mining industry, proposed removing a Reagan-era rule known as the “buffer zone rule” that prohibits coal-mining activities from disrupting areas within 100 feet of streams.35

In May 2002, the Bush administration finalized a new rule that allows mountaintop removal coal operations and other mining industries to dump coal and hardrock mining waste, construction and demolition debris, and other solid industrial wastes into streams, rivers, coastal waters, wetlands, and other waterways—legally.36

In January 2002, the Army Corps of Engineers and EPA relaxed standards for Clean Water Act “nationwide permits” – five year general permits that allow the filling of wetlands and streams but do not receive the same level of environmental scrutiny as individual permits and provide no public notice or comment opportunity.37

Troubled Waters 16

Recommendations

ore than 30 years after passage of the Clean Water Act, its most basic promises remain unfulfilled. MWe need to tighten enforcement of the law and strengthen the Act’s fundamental principles. Unless we punish polluters that exceed their permits and reduce the amount of pollution facilities can discharge legally, we will never realize the Clean Water Act’s vision of waters free of toxic pollutants and safe enough for fishing and swimming.

The Bush Administration Should Strengthen, Not Weaken, the Clean Water Act

As detailed above, the Bush administration has suggested, formally proposed or enacted policies designed to limit the Clean Water Act in scope and in strength. Thirty years after the birth of this landmark legislation, more than 300,000 miles of rivers and shoreline and five million acres of lakes remain too contaminated for recreational use.38 Rather than weakening the Clean Water Act, the Bush administration should:

Withdraw the January 2003 policy directive that eliminates Clean Water Act protections for many small streams, wetlands, and other waters.

Fund EPA at the levels necessary to hire adequate environmental enforcement staff and enforce the Clean Water Act.

Fully fund the EPA’s Clean Water State Revolving Fund to help communities improve their wastewater treatment systems.

Direct EPA to ensure that all sewage is properly treated, implement the proposed rule to regulate sanitary sewer overflows, and improve public notification of overflows that threaten human health.

Withdraw all proposed rules to exempt certain industries from the Clean Water Act.

Policy-Makers Should Tighten Enforcement of the Clean Water Act

The Bush administration should strengthen the Clean Water Act to help reach the goal of pollution-free waters.

Prevent Facilities from Profiting from Pollution

The existing Clean Water Act allows “economic benefits” to be taken into consideration when assessing penalties. Unfortunately, EPA has acknowledged that penalties rarely recover the profits companies gain from their non-compliance. In other words, under current Clean Water Act enforcement practices, it often pays to pollute illegally, which creates incentives to break the law, allows states and violators to cut sweetheart deals, and places those who comply with the law at a competitive disadvantage. Courts and

Troubled Waters 17 administrative hearing officers should assess a penalty that exceeds the amount of economic benefit gained by the polluter as the result of its non-compliance. In addition, any state with an authorized Clean Water Act program should collect and make public all fines levied and collected against polluters.

Tighten Pollution Limits

With the Clean Water Act, Congress intended to eliminate water pollution through a gradual tightening of permits based on emerging control technologies. The Act’s authors envisioned progressive permit tightening, coupled with enforcement actions against permit violators, to eventually reduce industrial and municipal pollution levels and achieve the interim Clean Water Act goal of fishable and swimmable waterways and ultimately zero discharge.

Progressive permit tightening, however, has not occurred consistently. By failing to regularly reevaluate permit limits and lower allowable pollution levels based on advances in technology, the government is missing a fundamental opportunity to reduce and eliminate pollution.

Revoke Permits from Repeat Violators

Under the principles of the Clean Water Act, EPA and state agencies are not issuing facilities permits to pollute indefinitely, but are granting them a temporary right to discharge pollution into waterways while they reduce and eventually eliminate their waste stream. This temporary right must not be taken for granted. EPA and state agencies should deny permit issuance or renewal to applicants whose compliance history shows a repeated pattern of significant noncompliance with the Clean Water Act.

Implement Pollution Prevention Initiatives

Pollution prevention means reducing the use of chemical inputs in order to generate less toxic waste, rather than relying on end-of-pipe pollution control technologies to stop waste chemicals from entering water discharges. Pollution prevention tends to be more effective in cutting use of chemicals and often saves facilities money otherwise spent handling hazardous materials.

Each applicant for a permit to discharge one or more pollutants should be required to submit, with the application for the permit, a pollution prevention plan that details the applicant’s plans for reducing and eliminating the use and discharge of such pollutants at a measurable rate.

Remove Current Obstacles to Citizen Suits

Citizens should be allowed to sue for past violations of the Clean Water Act, similar to the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act. Furthermore, inadequate government enforcement actions should not preclude citizen suits. Only judicial or enforcement actions that recoup the full economic benefit gained by violating the law should preclude subsequent citizen enforcement.

Troubled Waters 18 Expand the Public’s Right to Know

Access to accurate and consistent reporting is fundamental to the success of the Clean Water Act’s permitting and enforcement programs. Without it, protection of our waterways is impossible.

EPA should modernize the Permit Compliance System as soon as possible to ensure that permit data on all major facilities (at minimum) in each state are accurate, up-to-date, and comprehensive.

EPA and the states should compile and make public an analysis of enforcement actions taken during the preceding year, including the number of enforcement actions; the type of enforcement action; the average penalty assessed and collected for each action; the number of facilities in noncompliance and the reason for such noncompliance; and the number and percentage of facilities with expired permits.

EPA should maintain and expand the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) program. Since 1987, TRI has ensured the public’s right-to-know about toxic pollution in communities by requiring companies to disclose the pollution they release to the water, air, and land, transfer off site, or dispose in a waste dump. EPA should drop its proposed rule39 to weaken the program by reducing the amount or quality of information available to the public and instead look for ways to expand TRI.

EPA should expand the public’s right to know to include information on chemical use. While TRI discloses facilities’ direct discharges of chemical pollution every year, little public information exists about chemicals used in workplaces and placed in products. In order to move toward the Clean Water Act’s goal of zero-discharge, industrial facilities need to practice pollution prevention—reducing the use of chemicals at the source—rather than relying on pollution control technologies to limit releases once waste has been generated. Requiring companies to disclose their chemical use gives them an incentive to reduce use. In Massachusetts, where chemical-use reporting is required in combination with pollution prevention planning, companies decreased their toxic chemical use by 38% between 1990 and 2003. These companies are generating 68% less byproducts or waste per unit of product and have reduced releases of certain on-site chemicals by 92%.40

EPA should maintain and expand the Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) database. The ECHO database provides the public with access to important information about facilities’ compliance with the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. EPA should continue to expand the information provided to the public on this site and deny any requests by the regulated industries to remove any information from the public domain.

Troubled Waters 19

Methodology

1. Obtaining the data. To obtain the data, we submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in April 2005, to which EPA responded in September 2005.

2. Scope and source of the data. The data provided through the FOIA request contains summary data about active major facilities in the Clean Water Act’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. All information was generated from the Permit Compliance System (PCS) and Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA) system. The data covers the time period spanning July 1, 2003 through December 31, 2004.

3. Ensuring accuracy of the data. After receiving the data from EPA, we contacted each state agency— except in states where EPA administers the NPDES program—and offered them an opportunity to review the data for accuracy. The following states (in addition to the states where EPA administers the Clean Water Act) did not review any of the water quality data, due to resource limitations or failure to respond to repeated requests: Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Tennessee, and Wyoming.

In addition to making the corrections noted by the state agencies, we deleted or updated the following records from the database provided by EPA:

- We deleted all exceedances greater than 10,000% as likely data entry errors, except for parameters such as fecal coliform and e.coli.

- In certain instances, PCS parameter-level effluent violations will show the value 99999% over limit. This value is a code indicating that PCS was not able to properly interpret the measurement that was submitted by the permittee. Therefore, 99999% values are not necessarily violations; as such, we excluded these 99999% values from our analysis, except as noted below.

- Some facilities reported discharges of “<“ or “>“ a given value. EPA’s PCS database drops the “<“ and “>“ symbols and calculates the violation as the base number; in most cases, we were unable to verify whether the PCS database correctly calculated the percentage over the effluent permit limit. We eliminated all records for which states reported discharges using a character such as “<“ or “>“, except when the facility reported a discharge of “>“ a given value that was higher than the permitted limit. We coded these records, which often show a 99999% value, as an “apparent exceedance of undetermined magnitude.”

- Some facilities hold permits for parameters that do not set specific discharge limits but instead are PASS/FAIL or YES/NO. For many of these, EPA valued the exceedances at 99999%. We counted any violation of a PASS/FAIL or YES/NO permit parameter as a 100% exceedance.

- EPA provided us with data on facilities’ compliance with their “concentration minimum” permits. We chose to exclude this data from our analysis given data quality concerns.

4. Data limitations. The data covers major facilities only. Facilities are designated as “major” based on an EPA scoring system that considers a combination of factors, including toxic pollutant potential,

Troubled Waters 20 streamflow volume, public health impacts, and proximity to coastal waters. For example, a major municipal facility is a publicly owned treatment works that serves a population of 10,000 or more, discharges one million gallons or more of wastewater daily, or has a significant impact on water quality. Because we only looked at major facilities, this report examines a small subset of the total number of facilities discharging pollutants into U.S. waters.

5. California, Oregon and Washington data. EPA expressed concern that the California, Oregon and Washington data were not complete. As such, we chose to exclude California, Oregon and Washington from the report’s analysis. EPA is working with the states to update the data in PCS.

6. Michigan data. EPA also indicated that Michigan was in the process of inputting additional data into EPA’s database. As a result, Michigan’s violations may be under-reported.

7. Definition of “exceedance.” We count any exceedance (greater than 0% above the permit level) for any given parameter during any given reporting period as an exceedance. If a facility exceeded its permit level for a given parameter for quantity average, quantity maximum, concentration average and concentration maximum during the same reporting period, we count this as four exceedances but as one facility in violation.

8. Definition of an “apparent exceedance of undetermined magnitude.” In some cases, facilities report a discharge of “>“ a given value. When this value was higher than the permitted limit, we coded each of these records as an “apparent exceedance of undetermined magnitude.” For parameters such as fecal coliform, some facilities reported “T”, which means “too many to count.” We also categorized each of these instances as an “apparent exceedance of undetermined magnitude.”

9. Calculating the average permit violation by state. To calculate the average exceedance (measured as the percent over the permit limit), we first averaged the exceedances by category (quantity average percent over, quantity maximum percent over, concentration average percent over, concentration maximum percent over), excluding non-violations and fields displaying EPA’s 99999% code. We then averaged each of these four averages together to obtain each state’s total average.

10. Number of major facilities by state and county. Data for the number of major facilities in each state and county, which forms the basis of the calculations in Table 1 and Table 2, were obtained by searching by state for all major facilities at http://www.epa.gov/echo/compliance_report_water.html.

Troubled Waters 21

Appendix A. Facilities Exceeding Their Clean Water Act Permits for at Least 9 of the 18 Reporting Periods between July 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004

# of Reporting Facility Periods with State Number Facility Name County Name Receiving Water Exceedance Alabama AL0057657 ATTALLA CITY OF WWT LAGOON ETOWAH COOSA RIVER 18 Delaware DE0000655 GENERAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION NEW CASTLE DELAWARE RIVER 18 Delaware DE0050580 DELMARVA P & L INDIAN RIVER PO SUSSEX ISLAND CREEK (INDIAN RIVER) 18 District of Columbia DC0021199 D.C. WASA (BLUE PLAINS) WASHINGTON POTOMAC, ANACOSTIA,& PINEY RIVERS 18 Florida FL0026557 PLANT CITY STP HILLSBOROUGH WEST SIDE CANAL TO PEMBERTON CRK 18 Georgia GA0047147 AUGUSTA (SPIRIT CRK WPCP) RICHMOND SPIRIT CRK TRIB/ SAV. RV 18 Hawaii HI0020117 HONOLULU, CITY & CNTY HONOLULU PACIFIC OCEAN 18 Idaho ID0022063 NAMPA, CITY OF CANYON INDIAN CREEK 18 Illinois IL0022519 JOLIET EAST STP WILL HICKORY CREEK AT DES PLAINES RIVER 18 Illinois IL0048526 ROMEOVILLE STP #1 AND #2 WILL DES PLAINES RIVER 18 Indiana IN0022829 EAST CHICAGO_MUNICIPAL STP LAKE GRAND CALUMET R TO LAKE MICHIGAN 18 Iowa IA0021377 Carroll, City of STP CARROLL LATERAL NUMBER 77 18 Louisiana LA0044008 NEW IBERIA, CITY OF (ADMIRAL D IBERIA SEG 0609 VERMILION-TECHE BASIN 18 Maine ME0100617 SANFORD SEWERAGE DISTRICT YORK MOUSAM RIVER 18 Massachusetts MA0100552 LYNN REGIONAL WPCF ESSEX LYNN HARBOR (BROAD SOUND) 18 Massachusetts MA0100862 WINCHENDON WPCF WORCESTER MILLERS RIVER 18 Massachusetts MA0100986 EAST FITCHBURG WWTF WORCESTER NASHUA RIVER, NORTH BRANCH 18 Mississippi MS0003115 MISSISSIPPI PHOSPHATES CORP JACKSON BAYOU CASOTTE 18 New York NY0033308 SENECA FALLS (V) WWTP SENECA SENECA R 18 Ohio OH0001872 DETREX CORP. ASHTABULA FIELDS BROOK 18 Pennsylvania PA0002062 RELIANT ENERGY NORTHEAST MGMT ARMSTRONG CROOKED CREEK/PLUM CREEK 18 Pennsylvania PA0006327 ALLEGHENY LUDLUM CORP WESTMORELAND KISKIMINETAS RV & ELDER RUN 18 Pennsylvania PA0012751 ZINC CORP OF AMERICA - PALMERT CARBON AQUASHICOLA CREEK & LEHIGH RIVER 18 Texas TX0009148 CONOCOPHILLIPS COMPANY HUTCHINSON CANADIAN RIVER 18 Texas TX0025950 NORTH TEXAS MWD COLLIN MUDDY CREEK, LAKE RAY 18 Texas TX0053112 THE COLONY, CITY OF DENTON LAKE LEWISVILLE 18 Texas TX0077232 CIBOLO CREEK MUNICIPAL AUTHORI BEXAR MID CIBOLO CREEK 18 West Virginia WV0003336 ISG WEIRTON, INC. HANCOCK OHIO RIVER 18 West Virginia WV0005533 CREO MANUFACTURING AMERICA JEFFERSON Turkey Run/Opequon Creek/Potomac Ri 18 West Virginia WV0021792 CITY OF PETERSBURG GRANT Lunice Creek of South Potomac River 18 West Virginia WV0022349 CHARLES TOWN CITY OF JEFFERSON EVITTS RUN/Shenandoah River 18 West Virginia WV0023175 ST ALBANS CITY OF KANAWHA Kanawha River/Ohio River 18 West Virginia WV0023230 WHEELING CITY OF OHIO OHIO RIVER 18 West Virginia WV0027472 NEW MARTINSVILLE CITY OF WETZEL OHIO RIVER 18 West Virginia WV0032336 BUCKHANNON CITY OF UPSHUR BUCKHANNON RIVER/Tygart Valley Rive 18 Alaska AK0022951 JUNEAU, CITY & BOROUGH OF JUNEAU DIV MENDENHALL RIVER 17 Arkansas AR0021661 CABOT, CITY OF LONOKE TRIB, BU TWO PRAIRIE 17 Arkansas AR0022250 DERMOTT, CITY OF-SOUTH POND CHICOT BU BARTHOLOMEW,OUACHITA RV 17

Troubled Waters 22 # of Reporting Facility Periods with State Number Facility Name County Name Receiving Water Exceedance Arkansas AR0034380 STUTTGART, CITY OF ARKANSAS DIT,KING BU,BU METO,ARKANSAS RV 17 Georgia GA0003646 KERR-MCGEE PIGMENTS CHATHAM SAVANNAH RV 17 Hawaii HI0110230 US NAVY HONOLULU PEARL HARBOR 17 Illinois IL0031488 TROY STP MADISON TROY CK-WENDEL BR-SILVER CK-KSKSKIA 17 Iowa IA0035947 CLINTON CITY OF STP CLINTON MISSISSIPPI RIVER 17 Massachusetts MA0100030 MARION WWTF PLYMOUTH BROOK TO AUCOOT COVE TO BUZZARDS 17 Massachusetts MA0100625 GLOUCESTER WPCF ESSEX GLOUCESTER HARBOR (ATLANTIC OCEAN) 17 New Hampshire NH0100790 KEENE WWTF CHESHIRE ASHUELOT RIVER 17 New York NY0020290 AMSTERDAM (C) WWTP MONTGOMERY MOHAWK R 17 Pennsylvania PA0002437 SHENANGO INC ALLEGHENY OHIO RIVER 17 Pennsylvania PA0005037 EME HOMER CITY GENERATION LP INDIANA TRIB TWO LICK CREEK/BLACKLICK CR 17 Tennessee TN0024287 HALLSDALE-POWELL-BEAVER CR. ST KNOX BEAVER CR 17 Tennessee TN0026247 BELLS LAGOON CROCKETT FORKED DEER RV 17 West Virginia WV0024589 WELCH CITY OF MCDOWELL Tug Fork/Big Sandy River/Ohio River 17 West Virginia WV0028088 WESTON CITY OF LEWIS WEST FORK RIVER 17 Alaska AK0021547 CORDOVA, CITY OF CORDOVA-MCCARTHY DI ORCA INLET 16 Connecticut CT0001384 415 WASHINGTON AVE. PARTNERS NEW HAVEN QUINNIPIAC RIVER 16 Connecticut CT0100366 NEW HAVEN EAST SHORE WPCF NEW HAVEN NEW HAVEN HARBOR 16 Florida FL0173371 SPENCER’S WWTP CLAY SPENCER WETLAND 16 Indiana IN0025135 AUSTIN MUNICIPAL WWTP SCOTT MUSCATATUCK R VIA STUCKER CR -HUTTO 16 Kentucky KY0020036 NICHOLASVILLE STP JESSAMINE TOWN BR 16 Kentucky KY0095877 NORTH AMERICAN STAINLESS CARROLL OHIO RIVER 16 Louisiana LA0036412 E BATON ROUGE CITY-PAR (SOUTH) EAST BATON ROUGE MISSISSIPPI RIVER 16 Louisiana LA0042048 JEFFERSON PARISH-MARRERO STP JEFFERSON MAYRONNE CANAL/MILLAUDON CANAL 16 Louisiana LA0110931 CS METALS OF LA INC- SAINT JAMES BLIND RIVER 16 Maine ME0102075 PORTLAND WATER DIST.-PORTLAND CUMBERLAND CASCO BAY 16 Massachusetts MA0101061 NORTH BROOKFIELD WWTP WORCESTER DUNN BROOK 16 Mississippi MS0025526 MCCOMB POTW - EAST SAND FILTER PIKE TOWN CREEK 16 New Hampshire NH0100234 PORTSMOUTH-PIERCE ISLAND WWTP ROCKINGHAM PISCATAQUA RIVER 16 New York NY0026697 NEW ROCHELLE SD WESTCHESTER LONG ISLAND SOUND 16 Ohio OH0027600 CITY OF STRUTHERS MAHONING MAHONING 16 Oklahoma OK0038440 ARDMORE, CITY OF CARTER 310800 SAND CK/TR/CADDO CK/WASHITA 16 Rhode Island RI0100072 NBC - BUCKLIN POINT WWTF PROVIDENCE SEEKONK/MOSHASSUCK & BLACKSTONE RIV 16 West Virginia WV0020028 ELKINS CITY OF RANDOLPH Tygart Valley River/Monongahela Riv 16 Arizona AZ0020150 US IBWC SANTA CRUZ SANTA CRUZ RIVER 15 Arizona AZ0021555 NAVAJO TRIBAL UTILITY AUTH APACHE BLACK CREEK 15 Florida FL0020532 ORMOND BEACH STP VOLUSIA HALIFAX RV 15 Florida FL0023922 ORANGE PARK-ASH ST STP CLAY SAINT JOHNS RIVER 15 Idaho ID0020095 BURLEY, CITY OF CASSIA SNAKE RIVER 15 Illinois IL0023612 CLINTON SD STP DE WITT COON CK-SALT CK-SANGAMON RIVER 15 Illinois IL0024767 SPRINGFIELD CWLP SANGAMON LAKE SPRINGFIELD 15 Illinois IL0028517 DUQUOIN STP PERRY REESE CREEK (BIG MUDDY BASIN) 15 Indiana IN0000281 U.S. STEEL LLC - GARY WORKS LAKE GRAND CALUMET R TO LAKE MICHIGAN 15 Indiana IN0022977 GARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLNT LAKE GRAND CALUMET R & LITTLE CALUMET R 15 Indiana IN0032964 CRAWFORDSVILLE WWTP, CITY OF MONTGOMERY OR/WABASH RIVER/SUGAR CREEK 15

Troubled Waters 23 # of Reporting Facility Periods with State Number Facility Name County Name Receiving Water Exceedance Louisiana LA0041751 EUNICE, CITY OF (ST LANDRY) ST LANDRY BAYOU MALLETT 15 Massachusetts MA0100650 MILLBURY WWTP WORCESTER TIED INTO UPPER BLACKSTONE 15 Massachusetts MA0100722 NORTHBRIDGE WWTP WORCESTER UNNAMED BROOK TO BLACKSTONE RIVER 15 Mississippi MS0027294 E I DU PONT DE NEMOURS-DELISLE HARRISON SAINT LOUIS BAY 15 Missouri MO0023221 MACON WWTF MACON SEWER CR 15 Missouri MO0030970 ST PETERS, SPENCER CR STP SAINT CHARLES SPENCER CR 15 New York NY0027901 OCSD #1 HARRIMAN STP ORANGE RAMAPO R 15 North Carolina NC0023981 Lenoir Lower Creek WWTP CALDWELL Lower Creek 15 North Carolina NC0024112 Thomasville Hamby Creek WWTP DAVIDSON Hamby Creek 15 Ohio OH0024040 CITY OF BEDFORD CUYAHOGA WOOD CREEK 15 Ohio OH0049379 CLERMONT CO. COMMISSIONERS CLERMONT UNT EAST FORK OF LITTLE MIAMI 15 Pennsylvania PA0026778 WINDBER AREA AUTH CAMBRIA UNT OF STONY CREEK & STONY CREEK 15 Rhode Island RI0000043 BRADFORD DYEING ASSOC., INC. WASHINGTON PAWCATUCK WOOD 15 Tennessee TN0020541 SMYRNA STP RUTHERFORD STEWARTS CR 15 West Virginia WV0082759 BERKELEY COUNTY PSSD BERKELEY EAGLE RUN 15 Alabama AL0022632 BAYOU LA BATRE U B WWTP MOBILE PORTSVILLE BAY 14 Alabama AL0023205 PRICHARD WWSB C A MORRIS PT MOBILE THREE MILE CREEK 14 Arkansas AR0036498 BENTON, CITY OF SALINE TRIB,DEPOT CK,SALINE RV 14 Georgia GA0023949 MCDONOUGH (WALNUT CRK WPCP) HENRY WALNUT CRK. TRIB/TO SOUTH RIVER.... 14 Illinois IL0021989 SPRINGFIELD SD SPRING CREEK SANGAMON SANGAMON RIVER AND SPRING CREEK 14 Illinois IL0023027 DEKALB S.D. STP DE KALB S BR KISHWAUKEE RVR TO ROCK RIVER 14 Illinois IL0026514 ROCK FALLS STP WHITESIDE ROCK RIVER 14 Illinois IL0033481 GRANITE CITY WWTP MADISON CHAIN OF ROCKS CANAL 14 Indiana IN0025666 MADISON MUNICIPAL STP JEFFERSON OHIO RIVER 14 Louisiana LA0033430 OAKDALE, CITY OF ALLEN BEAVER CREEK/BOGGY CREEK/EAST FORK 14 Louisiana LA0038059 WESTWEGO, CITY OF JEFFERSON WPCA CANAL 14 Maine ME0100323 MACHIAS WWTF WASHINGTON MACHIAS RIVER 14 Massachusetts MA0100609 IPSWICH WWTF ESSEX GREENWOOD CREEK TO IPSWICH RIVER 14 Massachusetts MA0101010 BROCKTON A W R F PLYMOUTH SALISBURY PLAIN RIVER 14 Massachusetts MA0101036 NORTH ATTLEBOROUGH WWTP BRISTOL TEN MILE RIVER 14 Massachusetts MA0101214 GREENFIELD W P C P FRANKLIN GREEN RIVER TO DEERFIELD RIVER 14 Mississippi MS0029513 DCRUA/OLIVE BRANCH POTW DE SOTO CAMP CREEK 14 Mississippi MS0053503 CHOCTAW PEARL RIVER WWTP NESHOBA WOLF CRK TO KENTAWKA CNL TO PEARL R 14 New Hampshire NH0022055 ENVIROSYSTEMS INCORPORATED ROCKINGHAM TAYLOR RIVER 14 New Hampshire NH0023361 NEWINGTON POWER FACILITY ROCKINGHAM PISCATAQUA RIVER 14 New Mexico NM0020621 NAVAJO TRIBAL UTILITY AUTH SAN JUAN SAN JUAN RIVER 14 New York NY0022225 NOTT ROAD STP ALBANY NORMANSKILL CK 14 North Carolina NC0025909 Rutherfordton WWTP RUTHERFORD Cleghorn Creek 14 Ohio OH0020834 CITY OF JACKSON JACKSON SALT LICK CREEK 14 Ohio OH0025364 CITY OF GIRARD TRUMBULL LITTLE SQUAW CREEK 14 Ohio OH0045322 WEST CARROLLTON PARCHMENT MONTGOMERY OWL CREEK 14 Ohio OH0054305 FAIRFIELD CO COMMISSIONERS FAIRFIELD BLACKLICK CREEK 14 Ohio OH0127931 HANGING ROCK ENERGY FACILITY LAWRENCE OHIO RIVER (MILE MARKER 333) 14 Pennsylvania PA0002208 HORSEHEAD CORP BEAVER OHIO RIVER 14 Pennsylvania PA0008923 CORNING ASAHI VIDEO PROD CO CENTRE UNT TO LOGAN BRANCH 14

Troubled Waters 24 # of Reporting Facility Periods with State Number Facility Name County Name Receiving Water Exceedance Pennsylvania PA0025984 ALLEGHENY COUNTY SANITARY AUTH ALLEGHENY OHIO RIVER 14 Rhode Island RI0000191 KENYON INDUSTRIES, INC. WASHINGTON PAWCATUCK RIVER 14 Rhode Island RI0100293 NEWPORT WWTF NEWPORT NEWPORT HARBOR, NORTH END 14 Tennessee TN0020877 LAFAYETTE STP MACON TOWN CR MI 1.3 14 Tennessee TN0021261 SPRING CITY STP RHEA WATTS BAR LAKE 14 Tennessee TN0021865 PORTLAND STP SUMNER TR-SUMMERS BR 14 Tennessee TN0065358 SMITHVILLE STP DE KALB FALL CREEK AT MILE 4.7 14 Texas TX0021725 MARLIN, CITY OF FALLS BRAZOS RIVER SEG NO. 1242 14 Texas TX0054526 SEAGOVILLE, CITY OF DALLAS UNNAMED TRIBUTARY, TRINITY RIVER 14 Texas TX0100587 JACKSONVILLE, CITY OF (DOUBLE CHEROKEE UNNAMED-RAGSDALE CREEK 14 Virginia VA0003867 Omega Protein - Reedville NORTHUMBERLAND COCKRELLS CK 14 West Virginia WV0000086 BAYER CROPSCIENCE INSTITUTE SI KANAWHA KANAWHA RIVER 14 Alaska AK0020010 SKAGWAY, CITY OF SKAGWAY-YAKUTAT DIV TAIYA INLET 13 Florida FL0038857 APALACHICOLA, CITY OF FRANKLIN TRIB TO HUCKLEBERRY CR 13 Florida FL0041670 NORTHWEST REGIONAL WRF HILLSBOROUGH CHANNEL A 13 Illinois IL0031356 TAYLORVILLE SD STP CHRISTIAN PANTHER CREEK 13 Indiana IN0023132 HUNTINGTON MUNICIPAL WWTP HUNTINGTON OHIO RIVER FROM WABASH RIVER 13 Indiana IN0023582 LIGONIER MUNICIPAL STP NOBLE ELKHART R TO ST JOSEPH RIVER 13 Iowa IA0000256 ROQUETTE AMERICA, INC. LEE SOAP CREEK 13 Iowa IA0035866 KNOXVILLE CITY OF STP MARION COMPETINE CREEK 13 Iowa IA0036153 GARNER CITY OF STP HANCOCK EAST BRANCH IOWA RIVER 13 Louisiana LA0067083 SULPHUR,CITY OF-WWTP CALCASIEU CALCASIEU RIVER 13 Massachusetts MA0100919 SPENCER WWTP WORCESTER CRANBERRY BROOK (SEVEN MILE RVR) 13 Massachusetts MA0101257 ORANGE WWTP FRANKLIN MILLERS RIVER 13 New York NY0006670 NEPERA, INC ORANGE RAMAPO R 13 New York NY0026743 YORKTOWN HEIGHTS SD WWTP WESTCHESTER HALLOCKS MILL BK 13 New York NY0026956 ONEIDA (C) STP MADISON ONEIDA CK 13 North Carolina NC0026514 Raeford WWTP HOKE Rockfish Creek 13 Ohio OH0010910 TITANIUM METALS CORP. JEFFERSON JEDDO RUN 13 Ohio OH0020532 CITY OF BRYAN WILLIAMS PRAIRIE CREEK 13 Ohio OH0021083 CITY OF GREENFIELD HIGHLAND PAINT CREEK 13 Ohio OH0023221 CITY OF RAVENNA PORTAGE HOMMON AVE DITCH 13 Oklahoma OK0027677 IDABEL PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY MCCURTAIN 410200 MUD CREEK/THE LITTLE RIVER 13 Oklahoma OK0028134 OKMULGEE, CITY OF OKMULGEE 520700 OKMULGEE CK/TRIB/DEEP FORK 13 Pennsylvania PA0026387 ST MARYS MUN AUTH ELK ELK CREEK 13 Pennsylvania PA0216941 FOREST HILLS MUN AUTH CAMBRIA LITTLE CONEMAUGH RIVER 13 Rhode Island RI0100153 WEST WARWICK WWTF KENT PAWTUXET RIVER 13 Tennessee TN0020672 ROGERSVILLE STP HAWKINS CHEROKEE LK-RM 9 13 Tennessee TN0021687 PULASKI STP GILES RICHLAND CR 13 Tennessee TN0024341 LEXINGTON-EAST LAGOON HENDERSON BEECH RV 13 Texas TX0100170 DAYTON, CITY OF LIBERTY DRAINAGE DITCH;LINNEY CREEK;SPRING 13 Alaska AK0043451 UNALASKA, CITY OF ALEUTIAN ISLANDS DI UNALASKA BAY 12 Arkansas AR0048801 BARLING, CITY OF SEBASTIAN ARKANSAS RV 12 Florida FL0020559 PORT ORANGE WWTP VOLUSIA HALIFAX RV 12 Florida FL0021512 PANAMA CITY BEACH STP BAY WEST BAY 12

Troubled Waters 25 # of Reporting Facility Periods with State Number Facility Name County Name Receiving Water Exceedance Florida FL0026387 PERRY STP TAYLOR SPRING CREEK 12 Florida FL0027677 HOLLY HILL ADVANCED WWTF VOLUSIA HALIFAX RV 12 Georgia GA0020486 MONTEZUMA WPCP #2 MACON SPRING CRK/Downstream of Drayton Rd 12 Illinois IL0028550 EAST MOLINE REGIONAL WWTP ROCK ISLAND MISSISSIPPI RIVER 12 Indiana IN0032719 ELWOOD MUNICIPAL STP MADISON W FK WHITE R VIA BIG DUCK CREEK 12 Kansas KS0051942 ABILENE, CITY OF DICKINSON LWR SMOKY HILL RIVER 12 Kentucky KY0021270 LONDON STP LAUREL WHITLEY BR 12 Kentucky KY0021440 MORGANFIELD STP UNION CASEY CRK 12 Kentucky KY0024317 COLUMBIA STP ADAIR RUSSELL CRK 12 Kentucky KY0082007 GEORGETOWN STP #2 SCOTT LANES RUN 12 Louisiana LA0032131 ST CHARLES PARISH PH-LULING ST SAINT CHARLES GEORGE COUSIN CANAL 12 Louisiana LA0032328 HAMMOND CITY OF SOUTH POND TANGIPAHOA NATALABANY R TICKFAW R L MAUREPAS 12 Louisiana LA0038814 VILLE PLATTE, CITY OF EVANGELINE BAYOU JOE MARCEL 12 Louisiana LA0045730 DENHAM SPRINGS, CITY OF LIVINGSTON AMITE RIVER/LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN 12 Maryland MD0056545 SOD RUN WWTP HARFORD BUSH RIVER 12 Massachusetts MA0100579 MILFORD WWTF WORCESTER CHARLES RIVER 12 Michigan MI0004154 MARTIN MARIETTA-MAGN SPEC INC MANISTEE MANISTEE LAKE, MANISTEE R CHAN 12 Mississippi MS0054992 CLINTON POTW - SOUTHSIDE HINDS BAKERS CREEK 12 New Jersey NJ0004391 COLORITE POLYMERS COMPANY BURLINGTON MARTER’S DITCH 12 New Mexico NM0029165 RUIDOSO-RUIDOSO DOWNS WWTP-LIN LINCOLN SEG 2-208 PECOS RIVER BASIN 12 New York NY0020508 SALAMANCA (C) WWTP CATTARAUGUS ALLEGHENY R 12 New York NY0020656 SPENCERPORT (V) WWTP MONROE NORTHRUP CK 12 New York NY0020958 CAYUGA HEIGHTS (V) WWTP TOMPKINS CAYUGA L 12 New York NY0022128 GREAT NECK (V) WPCP NASSAU MANHASSET BAY 12 New York NY0023256 VALLEY RIVER, INC ORLEANS SANDY CK E BR 12 New York NY0023647 HORNELL (C) WPCP STEUBEN CANISTEO R 12 New York NY0026034 EAST GREENBUSH (T) WWTP RENSSELAER HUDSON R 12 New York NY0026786 PORT CHESTER SANITARY SD WWTP WESTCHESTER BYRAM R 12 New York NY0028851 STONY POINT (T) WWTP ROCKLAND HUDSON R 12 New York NY0030988 GREENPORT (T) STP COLUMBIA CLAVERACK CK 12 North Carolina NC0020044 Williamston WWTP MARTIN ROANOKE RIVER 12 North Carolina NC0041408 Anson County Regional WWTP ANSON PEE DEE RIVER 12 Ohio OH0011371 WHEELING PITTSBURG STEEL JEFFERSON OHIO RIVER 12 Ohio OH0021628 CITY OF AMHERST LORAIN BEAVER CREEK 12 Ohio OH0026328 CITY OF MANSFIELD RICHLAND ROCKY FORK MOHICAN RIVR 12 Ohio OH0076490 OHIO DEPT OF REHAB & CORR ROSS SCIOTO RIVER 12 Oklahoma OK0031798 MIAMI, CITY OF -SOUTHEAST WSTW OTTAWA 121600 NEOSHO RIVER 12 Oklahoma OK0031909 BLACKWELL, CITY OF KAY 621100 CHIKASKIA RIVER 12 Oklahoma OK0035246 LAWTON, CITY OF-LAWTON STP COMANCHE 311300 NINEMILE CREEK/E CACHE CK 12 Pennsylvania PA0000868 WHEATLAND TUBE CO - DIVISION O MERCER SHENANGO RIVER 12 Pennsylvania PA0223034 DUFERCO FARRELL CORP MERCER SHENANGO RIVER 12 Tennessee TN0020656 CLARKSVILLE STP MONTGOMERY BARKLEY RES @ CUMBERLAND MI 125 12 Tennessee TN0058181 LOUDON STP LOUDON TENNESSEE RV 12 Tennessee TN0064688 MONTEREY STP PUTNAM FALLING WATER RIVER MILE 46.1 12 Tennessee TN0075078 BROWNSVILLE WWT LAGOON HAYWOOD SOUTH FORK FORKED DEER RV ML 30.6 12

Troubled Waters 26 # of Reporting Facility Periods with State Number Facility Name County Name Receiving Water Exceedance Texas TX0004715 ALCOA WORLD ALUMINA LLC AND AL CALHOUN LAVACA BAY 12 Texas TX0088633 N TEXAS MWD-WILSON CREEK COLLIN SEG 0821 LAKE LAVON 12 Texas TX0101915 FORT BEND COUNTY MUD NO. 106 FORT BEND VIA PIPELINE TO RABBS BAYOU 12 Utah UT0020109 SPANISH FORK CITY CORP UTAH DRY CREEK 12 Vermont VT0100242 NORTHFIELD MTP WASHINGTON DOG RIVER 12 Wisconsin WI0025593 SUPERIOR SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTE DOUGLAS SUPERIOR BAY-ST 12 Alabama AL0020206 ATHENS UTILITIES WWTP LIMESTONE TOWN CREEK 11 Delaware DE0000558 CONECTIV DELMARVA GENERATION NEW CASTLE DELAWARE RIVER 11 Florida FL0000051 E I DUPONT DE NEMOURS - TRAILR BRADFORD ALLIGATOR CREEK 11 Illinois IL0028622 EFFINGHAM STP EFFINGHAM UNNAMED TRIB SALT CK-WABASH RVR 11 Illinois IL0030660 PERU STP #1 LA SALLE ILLINOIS RIVER 11 Indiana IN0020095 PORTLAND MUNICIPAL WWTP JAY OR/WABASH RIVER/SALAMONIE RIVER 11 Indiana IN0021024 WINCHESTER MUNICIPAL WWTP RANDOLPH W FK WHITE RIVER 11 Indiana IN0023914 NEW CASTLE MUNICIPAL STP HENRY BIG BLUE R TO DRIFTWOOD RIVER 11 Iowa IA0032344 OELWEIN CITY OF STP FAYETTE OTTER CREEK 11 Kansas KS0032123 IOLA, CITY OF ALLEN NEOSHO RIVER 11 Kentucky KY0052752 MOREHEAD STP ROWAN LICKING RIVER 11 Louisiana LA0059951 WALKER, TOWN OF LIVINGSTON TAYLOR CR,MIDDLE COLYELL CK,AMITE R 11 Massachusetts MA0100196 UPTON WWTP WORCESTER WEST RIVER 11 Michigan MI0022853 EAST LANSING WWTP INGHAM RED CEDAR RIVER 11 Minnesota MN0040665 SO MINNESOTA BEET SUGAR COOP RENVILLE CD 37-E FK BEAVE 11 Minnesota MN0055301 NORTHSHORE MINING/SILVER BAY P LAKE BEAVER R 11 Mississippi MS0042030 BOONEVILLE POTW PRENTISS TUSCUMBIA RIVER 11 Missouri MO0001171 AECI, NEW MADRID PP NEW MADRID MISS/PORTAGE BAYOU 11 Missouri MO0025283 UNION WWTF FRANKLIN BOURBEUSE R. 11 Missouri MO0080632 FESTUS-CRYSTAL CITY STP JEFFERSON PLATTIN CR. 11 Montana MT0020311 LAUREL- CITY OF YELLOWSTONE YELLOWSTONE RIVER 11 Nebraska NE0021504 MCCOOK WWTF RED WILLOW TRIB RE RIVER 11 New Hampshire NH0100471 MILFORD WWTF HILLSBOROUGH SOUHEGAN RIVER 11 New Hampshire NH0100595 JAFFREY WWTF CHESHIRE CONTOOCOOK RIVER 11 New York NY0004103 HORSEHEADS FACILITY CHEMUNG DIVEN CK 11 New York NY0005193 RAVENSWOOD GENERATING STATION QUEENS EAST R 11 New York NY0020125 LOWVILLE (V) MUNICIPAL PCP LEWIS MILL CK 11 New York NY0021849 ATTICA (V) WWTP WYOMING TONAWANDA CK 11 New York NY0022365 WATERLOO (V) STP SENECA SENECA R 11 New York NY0022446 NEW WINDSOR (T) STP ORANGE MOODNA CK 11 New York NY0022543 ERIE CO SD#2 WWTP @ BIG SISTER ERIE BIG SISTER CK 11 New York NY0023582 CHATHAM (V) WWF COLUMBIA STONY KILL 11 New York NY0027049 MARSH CREEK WWTP ONTARIO SENECA L 11 New York NY0031003 AKRON (V) WWTP ERIE MURDER CK 11 North Carolina NC0032077 Contentnea Metro Swrg Dist Con PITT Contentnea Creek 11 Ohio OH0025488 HAMILTON COUNTY HAMILTON SYCAMORE CREEK 11 Ohio OH0027324 CITY OF SALEM COLUMBIANA MIDDLE FORK, LITTLE BEAVER CREEK 11 Ohio OH0048372 MIBA AG MORGAN MUSKINGUM RIVER 11 Ohio OH0127841 DUKE ENERGY WASHINGTON, LLC WASHINGTON MUSKINGUM RIVER 11

Troubled Waters 27 # of Reporting Facility Periods with State Number Facility Name County Name Receiving Water Exceedance Pennsylvania PA0027138 SHARON CITY MERCER SHENANGO RIVER 11 Pennsylvania PA0043885 GREATER POTTSVILLE AREA SEWER SCHUYLKILL SCHUYLKILL RIVER 11 Pennsylvania PA0110965 MID-CENTRE COUNTY AUTH CENTRE UNT OF BALD EAGLE CREEK 11 South Carolina SC0038156 YORK/FISHING CREEK WWTF YORK FISHING CREEK 11 Tennessee TN0020095 KINGSPORT STP SULLIVAN SO FORK-HOLSTON 11 Tennessee TN0061701 KINGSTON STP ROANE Clinch River @ M 0.28 11 Texas TX0023655 GALVESTON COUNTY WCID NO. 1 GALVESTON DICKINSON BAYOU TIDAL 11 Texas TX0047601 SAN BENITO, CITY OF CAMERON SEG. NUECES-RIO GRANDE COSTAL 11 Texas TX0124427 SHIN-ETSU SILICONES OF AMERICA BRAZORIA DOW PLANT “A” CANAL, SEG NO. 1201 11 Utah UT0000281 MILLER-E A, INC CACHE DITCH TO SPRING CREEK 11 West Virginia WV0004511 WHEELING PITTSBURGH STEEL CORP OHIO OHIO RIVER 11 West Virginia WV0020630 SUMMERSVILLE TOWN OF NICHOLAS ARBUCKLE CREEK/Gauley River/Kanawha 11 West Virginia WV0037486 UNION PSD MONROE Kanawha River/Ohio River 11 Alabama AL0003247 SLOSS INDUSTRIES CORPORATION JEFFERSON FIVE MILE CR 10 Alabama AL0023418 JASPER WWSB INC WWTP WALKER TOWN CREEK TO CANE CREEK 10 Alabama AL0024589 COLUMBIANA CITY OF WWTP SHELBY UT TO WAXAHATCHEE CREEK 10 Alabama AL0025828 ALABASTER CITY OF WTP SHELBY BUCK CREEK 10 Alabama AL0050237 H C MORGAN WPCF AUBURN CITY OF LEE PARKERSON MILL CREEK 10 Alabama AL0055786 SARALAND CITY OF SARALAND WWTP MOBILE BAYOU SARA 10 Connecticut CT0025305 QUALITY ROLLING & DEBURRING CO LITCHFIELD NAUGATUCK RIVER 10 Connecticut CT0100242 GROTON WPCF TOWN OF NEW LONDON THAMES RIVER 10 Connecticut CT0100447 PLAINFIELD NORTH WPCF WINDHAM MOOSUP RIVER 10 Connecticut CT0100714 CITY OF SHELTON, CITY HALL FAIRFIELD HOUSATONIC RIVER 10 Connecticut CT0101087 STAMFORD STP FAIRFIELD STAMFORD HARBOR 10 Florida FL0025984 DAYTONA BCH REG/BETH PT WWTPS VOLUSIA HALIFAX RV 10 Florida FL0027511 ARCADIA - WILLIAM TYSON WWTP DE SOTO PEACE RIVER 10 Georgia GA0020966 WAYCROSS WPCP WARE SATILLA RV 10 Illinois IL0031844 DUPAGE COUNTY-WOODRIDGE STP DU PAGE E BRNCH OF DUPAGE RVR & CRABTREE CK 10 Illinois IL0032735 BOLINGBROOK WRF #2 WILL EAST BRANCH OF DUPAGE RIVER 10 Indiana IN0060917 WARSAW WWTP #2 KOSCIUSKO TIPPECANOE RIVER 10 Iowa IA0075302 JESUP, CITY OF STP (SOUTH) BUCHANAN SPRING CREEK 10 Louisiana LA0036323 RUSTON, CITY-NORTHSIDE STP LINCOLN COLVIN CK-CYPRESS CK-BAYOU D’ARBONN 10 Louisiana LA0038431 AMITE CITY, TOWN OF TANGIPAHOA TANGIPAHOA RIVER 10 Louisiana LA0038962 MANSFIELD, CITY OF DE SOTO BAYOU NABONCHASSE 10 Louisiana LA0043915 WINNFIELD, CITY OF-WATER PLT WINN CREOSOTE BRANCH 10 Maine ME0101478 LEWISTON AUBURN W P C A ANDROSCOGGIN ANDROSCOGGIN RIVER 10 Massachusetts MA0004928 MIRANT CANAL LLC BARNSTABLE CAPE COD CANAL 10 Massachusetts MA0102148 BELCHERTOWN WWTP HAMPSHIRE LAMPSON BROOK 10 Massachusetts MA0102202 HOPEDALE WWTP WORCESTER MILL RIVER 10 Minnesota MN0046981 NORTHSHORE MINING CO;CLIFFS MN SAINT LOUIS PRTRDG R(2223)DNKA R,LNGLY CR(0702) 10 Mississippi MS0000931 PIPER IMPACT INCORPORATED UNION JASPER CREEK 10 Mississippi MS0020117 MERIDIAN POTW LAUDERDALE SOWASHEE CREEK 10 Missouri MO0101702 EXIDE TECHNOLOGIES HOLT CANON CR TO KINSEY B 10 Nebraska NE0027936 GERING WWTF SCOTTS BLUFF NORTH PLATTE R 10 New Hampshire NH0100455 DURHAM WWTF STRAFFORD OYSTER RIVER ESTUARY 10

Troubled Waters 28 # of Reporting Facility Periods with State Number Facility Name County Name Receiving Water Exceedance New York NY0020681 BLASDELL (V) WWTP ERIE LAKE ERIE 10 New York NY0021342 HUNTINGTON (T) STP SUFFOLK HUNTINGTON HARB 10 New York NY0028339 FRANK E VAN LARE WWTP MONROE L ONTARIO 10 North Carolina NC0024872 Davie Co Wtr Sys Cooleemee WWT DAVIE South Yadkin River 10 North Carolina NC0025445 Randleman WWTP RANDOLPH DEEP RIVER 10 North Carolina NC0030970 Spring Lake WWTP CUMBERLAND Little River (Lower Little River) 10 North Dakota ND0023434 BISMARCK CITY OF BURLEIGH MISSOURI RIVER 10 Ohio OH0007269 DOVER CHEMICAL TUSCARAWAS SUGAR CREEK 10 Ohio OH0011355 WHEELING PITTSBURG STEEL JEFFERSON OHIO RIVER 10 Ohio OH0020851 VILLAGE OF BLUFFTON ALLEN RILLEY CREEK 10 Ohio OH0026026 CITY OF LANCASTER FAIRFIELD HOCKING RIVER 10 Ohio OH0050016 SCIOTO COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SCIOTO PINE CREEK 10 Oklahoma OK0021521 BROKEN BOW PUBLIC WORKS AUTH. MCCURTAIN 410200 TRIB/YANUBBEE CK/LITTLE RIVR 10 Pennsylvania PA0005011 RELIANT ENERGY NORTHEAST MGMT INDIANA CONEMAUGH RIVER 10 Pennsylvania PA0005754 JEWEL ACQUISITION LLC BEAVER OHIO RIVER 10 Pennsylvania PA0026034 JOHNSTOWN REDEVELOPMENT AUTH CAMBRIA CONEMAUGH RIVER 10 Pennsylvania PA0026239 UNIVERSITY AREA JOINT AUTH - CENTRE SPRING CREEK 10 Pennsylvania PA0027430 JEANNETTE CITY MUN AUTH WESTMORELAND BRUSH CREEK 10 Pennsylvania PA0037966 MOSHANNON VALLEY JT SEW AUTH CENTRE MOSHANNON CREEK 10 Pennsylvania PA0045021 MSC PRE FINISH METALS INC BUCKS BILES CREEK 10 Rhode Island RI0100013 VEOLIA WATER-CRANSTON WPCF PROVIDENCE PAWTUXET RIVER 10 South Carolina SC0041696 GSW&SA/GEORGE R VEREEN WWTP HORRY CAROLINA BAYS 10 Tennessee TN0020079 MARYVILLE STP BLOUNT TENN RI MI 637.0 10 Tennessee TN0062367 BROWNSVILLE STP HAYWOOD HATCHIE RIVER AT MILE 76.3 10 Texas TX0006084 ROHM & HAAS TEXAS, INCORPORATE HARRIS SEG 1006 SAN JACINTO RIVER BASIN 10 Texas TX0007536 CONOCOPHILLIPS COMPANY BRAZORIA LINNVILLE BAYOU/CANEY CREEK 10 Texas TX0025569 GILMER, CITY OF UPSHUR SUGAR CREEK, LITTLE CYPRESS BAYOU 10 Texas TX0062995 HOUSTON, CITY OF (SOUTHWEST) HARRIS BRAYS BAYOU, HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL 10 Texas TX0063410 PASADENA, CITY OF HARRIS SEG NO 1007 SAN JACINTO RIVER BASIN 10 Texas TX0106071 LUBBOCK, CITY OF LUBBOCK LAKE RANSOM 10 Utah UT0021920 LOGAN CITY CORPORATION CACHE IRRIGATION DITCH TO CUTLER RES. 10 Virginia VA0090263 North Fork Modular Reclamation ROCKINGHAM N. FORK SHENANDOAH 10 West Virginia WV0001279 E I DUPONT DE NEMOURS & CO WOOD OHIO RIVER 10 West Virginia WV0023205 CHARLESTON CITY OF KANAWHA KANAWHA RIVER 10 West Virginia WV0023299 NITRO CITY OF KANAWHA KANAWHA RIVER/Ohio River 10 West Virginia WV0026271 WILLIAMSON CITY OF MINGO TUG FK 10 West Virginia WV0032590 LUBECK PSD WOOD OHIO 10 West Virginia WV0080403 SHADY SPRING PSD RALEIGH PINEY CREEK 10 Wisconsin WI0001040 TYCO SAFETY PRODUCTS - ANSUL MARINETTE MENOMONEE R AND 10 Wyoming WY0020648 Powell, City of PARK Bitter Creek (2) 10 Alabama AL0031372 SCOTTSBORO WSG SOUTHSIDE WWTP JACKSON TENNESSEE RIVER 9 Alaska AK0021440 KETCHIKAN, CITY OF KETCHIKAN DIV TONGASS NARROWS 9 Arizona AZ0020249 GLOBE, CITY OF GILA PINAL CREEK 9 Arizona AZ0020923 PIMA CNTY WASTEWATER MGMT PIMA SANTA CRUZ RIVER 9 Arizona AZ0021873 CASA GRANDE, CITY OF PINAL SANTA CRUZ WASH 9

Troubled Waters 29 # of Reporting Facility Periods with State Number Facility Name County Name Receiving Water Exceedance Arkansas AR0021482 VAN BUREN, CITY OF-MAIN PLANT CRAWFORD ARKANSAS RV 9 Arkansas AR0022292 DECATUR, CITY OF BENTON COLUMBIA HOLLOW CK,SPAVINAW CK 9 Connecticut CT0001457 WHYCO FINISHING TECHNOLOGIES, LITCHFIELD NAUGATUCK RIVER 9 Connecticut CT0100510 SOUTH WINDSOR WPCF HARTFORD CONNECTICUT RIVER 9 Florida FL0021270 FT MYERS-SOUTH STP LEE CALOOSAHATCHEE RIVER 9 Florida FL0030325 FL CITIES WATER-WATERWAY EST LEE CALOOSAHATCHIE RV 9 Georgia GA0025674 CANTON WPCP CHEROKEE ETOWAH RV/COOSA RV BASIN 9 Georgia GA0046655 PEACHTREE CTY (ROCKAWAY WPCP) FAYETTE LINE CRK TRIB TO /FLINT RIVER 9 Idaho ID0020028 GOODING, CITY OF GOODING LITTLE WOOD RIVER/BIG WOOD RIVER 9 Idaho ID0022853 COEUR D’ALENE, CITY OF KOOTENAI SPOKANE RIVER 9 Illinois IL0020575 PRINCETON STP BUREAU SKIN-EPPERSON-BIG BUREAU-IL RVR 9 Illinois IL0021971 SPRINGFIELD MSD-SUGAR CRK STP SANGAMON SUGAR CREEK 9 Illinois IL0022365 BENTON NORTHWEST STP FRANKLIN BIG MUDDY RIVER 9 Illinois IL0035891 FOX RIVER WRD WEST STP KANE FOX RIVER 9 Indiana IN0020397 SCOTTSBURG MUNICIPAL STP SCOTT MUSCATATUCK R VIA MCCLAIN D VIA TRB 9 Indiana IN0020834 JASPER MUNICIPAL STP DUBOIS PATOKA RIVER 9 Indiana IN0032972 SPEEDWAY MUNICIPAL STP MARION EAGLE CR TO W FK WHITE RIVER 9 Iowa IA0024554 CARLISLE CITY OF STP POLK DES MOINES RIVER 9 Kentucky KY0023370 CYNTHIANA STP HARRISON LICKING RIVER / SOUTH FORK 9 Louisiana LA0003026 CONOCO INC-LAKE CHARLES REFINE CALCASIEU BAYOU VERDINE 9 Louisiana LA0043982 WEST MONROE, CITY OF OUACHITA OUACHITA RIVER 9 Maine ME0101346 MOUNT DESERT TOWN OF HANCOCK ATLANTIC OCEAN 9 Massachusetts MA0100421 STURBRIDGE WPCF WORCESTER QUINEBAUG RIVER 9 Massachusetts MA0102598 CHARLES RIVER P C D NORFOLK CHARLES RIVER 9 Mississippi MS0020788 WEST POINT POTW - WEST CLAY TOWN CREEK TO DRAINAGE DITCH 9 Mississippi MS0036111 TUPELO POTW LEE DIRECTLY INTO TOWN CREEK 9 Mississippi MS0044164 COLUMBIA POTW - SOUTH MARION PEARL RIVER 9 Mississippi MS0055581 ABERDEEN - POTW EAST WWTF MONROE TENN-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY 9 Missouri MO0043648 POPLAR BLUFF WWTP BUTLER PIKE CR 9 Missouri MO0101087 LBVSD, ATHERTON PLANT JACKSON MISSOURI R. 9 New Hampshire NH0001473 P.S. OF NH-SCHILLER STATION ROCKINGHAM PISCATAQUA ESTUARY 9 New Mexico NM0020141 LOS ALAMOS CTY (BAYOU CANYON) LOS ALAMOS BAYOU CANYON 9 New Mexico NM0029351 ESPANOLA, CITY OF SANTA FE RIO GRANDE 9 New York NY0020419 WILSON (V) WWTP NIAGARA LAKE ONTARIO 9 New York NY0021610 WALTER W BRADLEY WPCF MONROE LAKE ONTARIO 9 New York NY0021750 PORT JEFFERSON SD#1 STP SUFFOLK PORT JEFFERSON HARBOR 9 New York NY0022411 SILVER CREEK (V) WWTP CHAUTAUQUA SILVER CK 9 New York NY0023531 FARMINGTON (T) STP ONTARIO MUD CK 9 New York NY0024333 ST JOHNSVILLE (V) WWTP MONTGOMERY MOHAWK R 9 New York NY0026328 MIDDLETOWN (C) STP ORANGE WALLKILL R 9 New York NY0026689 YONKERS JOINT WWTP WESTCHESTER HUDSON R 9 New York NY0027979 NIAGARA COUNTY SD#1 WWTP NIAGARA NIAGARA R E BR 9 New York NY0029106 OSWEGO (C) WEST SIDE WWTF OSWEGO LAKE ONTARIO - OSWEGO HARBOR 9 New York NY0036986 CHEMUNG CO SD#1 STP CHEMUNG CHEMUNG R 9 New York NY0072061 CWM CHEMICAL SERVICES LLC NIAGARA NIAGARA R 9

Troubled Waters 30 # of Reporting Facility Periods with State Number Facility Name County Name Receiving Water Exceedance North Carolina NC0003816 US MCAS Cherry Pt MCALF Atlant CRAVEN NEUSE RIVER 9 North Carolina NC0026824 NC DHHS Butner WWTP GRANVILLE Knap of Reeds Creek 9 North Carolina NC0031879 Marion Corpening Creek WWTP MCDOWELL Youngs Fork (Coperning Creek) 9 Ohio OH0006769 OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL HARDIN INTERNAL OUTFALL 9 Ohio OH0010413 HAMILTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC PL BUTLER GREAT MIAMI RIVER 9 Ohio OH0011339 WHEELING-PITTSBURGH STEEL BELMONT OHIO RIVER 9 Ohio OH0021776 VILLAGE OF COLUMBIANA COLUMBIANA MAHONING RIVER 9 Ohio OH0024929 CITY OF DELPHOS ALLEN JENNINGS CREEK 9 Ohio OH0026018 CITY OF LAKEWOOD CUYAHOGA LAKE ERIE 9 Ohio OH0027430 SOLON CITY CENTRAL CUYAHOGA BEAVER MEADOW RUN 9 Ohio OH0027952 CITY OF WAPAKONETA AUGLAIZE AUGLAIZE RIVER 9 Ohio OH0028223 CITY OF YOUNGSTOWN MAHONING MAHONING RIVER 9 Ohio OH0052744 CITY OF FOSTORIA SENECA PORTAGE RIVER 9 Ohio OH0120588 OHIO COATINGS CO BELMONT OHIO RIVER 9 Pennsylvania PA0009024 OSRAM SYLVANIA PRODUCTS INC BRADFORD NORTH BRANCH SUSQUEHANNA RIVER 9 Pennsylvania PA0013064 ELEMENTIS PIGMENTS INC NORTHAMPTON BUSHKILL CREEK 9 Pennsylvania PA0021768 SOMERSET BORO SOMERSET EAST BRANCH OF COXES CREEK 9 Pennsylvania PA0026298 WHITEMARSH TWP AUTH MONTGOMERY SCHUYLKILL RIVER 9 Pennsylvania PA0026379 BRADFORD SAN AUTH MCKEAN TUNUNGWANT CREEK 9 Pennsylvania PA0028487 HERMITAGE MUN AUTH - BOBBY RUN MERCER SHENANGO RIVER 9 Pennsylvania PA0209228 LYCOMING WATER & SEWER AUTH LYCOMING WEST BRANCH OF SUSQUEHANNA RVR 9 Rhode Island RI0000132 CLARIANT CORPORATION KENT PAWTUXET RIVER (SOUTH BRANCH) 9 South Carolina SC0021598 MONCKS CORNER WWTF BERKELEY COOPER RIVER 9 South Carolina SC0023264 KAWASHIMA TEXTILE USA INC KERSHAW WATEREE RIVER 9 South Carolina SC0025356 TIMMONSVILLE, TOWN OF FLORENCE SPARROW SWAMP TO LYNCHES 9 South Dakota SD0023396 YANKTON - CITY OF YANKTON MISSOURI RIVER 9 Tennessee TN0020613 MCKENZIE STP CARROLL CLEAR CREEK 9 Tennessee TN0022551 LAWRENCEBURG STP LAWRENCE SHOAL CR 9 Tennessee TN0022888 LEWISBURG STP MARSHALL BIG ROCK CREEK AT MILE 16.8 9 Tennessee TN0024121 CLEVELAND UTILITIES STP BRADLEY HIAWASSE RI MI 1 9 Tennessee TN0024830 WAVERLY LAGOON HUMPHREYS TENNESSEE RIVER-RIVER MILE 94 9 Texas TX0023647 LAGUNA MADRE WATER DISTRICT CAMERON TIDAL MUD FLAT, VADIA ANCHA, BROWNS 9 Texas TX0025470 BRENHAM, CITY OF WASHINGTON SEG NO 1202 BRAZOS RIVER BASIN 9 Texas TX0026018 NEW BOSTON, CITY OF BOWIE UNNAMED TRIB OF BIG CREEK 9 Texas TX0035106 HOUSTON, CITY OF (CLINTON PARK) HARRIS UNNAMED-HOUS SH CHNL BUFFALO 9 Texas TX0052779 HENDERSON, CITY OF RUSK HARDY CREEK/SHAWNEE CREEK 9 Texas TX0101281 GEORGETOWN, CITY OF WILLIAMSON SEG NO 1248 BRAZOS RIVER BASIN 9 Utah UT0020419 MOAB- CITY OF GRAND 9

Troubled Waters 31 Appendix B. Colorado Facilities Exceeding their Clean Water Act Permits at Least Once between July 1, 2003-December 31, 2004 Quantity Report Average Quantity Max Concentration Concentration Facility County Period End Percent Percent Average Percent Maximum Number Facility Name Name Receiving Water Parameter Description Date Violation Violation Violation Percent Violation CO0000612 PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLO PUEBLO ST. CHARLES RIVER BOD, 5-DAY (20 DEG. C) 7/31/2004 0 0 0 16 CO0000612 PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLO PUEBLO ST. CHARLES RIVER COLIFORM, FECAL GENERAL 6/30/2004 0 0 0 2 CO0000621 CF&I STEEL, L.P. PUEBLO ARKANSAS RIVER SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 8/31/2003 0 230 0 0 CO0001104 PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF COLO. ADAMS SOUTH PLATTE RIVER COPPER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 1/31/2004 0 0 0 6 CO0001147 SUNCOR ENERGY ADAMS ALL BUT 010 BEFORE ENTRNG SAND CRK BOD, 5-DAY (20 DEG. C) 7/31/2003 0 5 0 0 CO0001147 SUNCOR ENERGY ADAMS ALL BUT 010 BEFORE ENTRNG SAND CRK NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 7/31/2003 0 19 0 0 CO0001147 SUNCOR ENERGY ADAMS ALL BUT 010 BEFORE ENTRNG SAND CRK OIL & GREASE 12/31/2004 0 115 0 0 CO0001147 SUNCOR ENERGY ADAMS ALL BUT 010 BEFORE ENTRNG SAND CRK PH 8/31/2003 0 0 0 11 CO0001147 SUNCOR ENERGY ADAMS ALL BUT 010 BEFORE ENTRNG SAND CRK SELENIUM, TOTAL (AS SE) 9/30/2003 0 0 33 0 CO0001147 SUNCOR ENERGY ADAMS ALL BUT 010 BEFORE ENTRNG SAND CRK SELENIUM, TOTAL (AS SE) 10/31/2003 0 0 12 0 CO0001163 COORS BREWING COMPANY JEFFERSON CLEAR CREEK AND CROKE CANAL NITRITE PLUS NITRATE TOTAL 1 DET. (AS N) 10/31/2004 0 0 0 20 CO0001163 COORS BREWING COMPANY JEFFERSON CLEAR CREEK AND CROKE CANAL NITRITE PLUS NITRATE TOTAL 1 DET. (AS N) 10/31/2004 0 0 0 20 CO0001210 COLORADO REFINING COMPANY ADAMS SAND CRK/045&046 FAC WWT SYSTEM BOD, 5-DAY (20 DEG. C) 11/30/2003 0 119 0 0 CO0001210 COLORADO REFINING COMPANY ADAMS SAND CRK/045&046 FAC WWT SYSTEM BOD, 5-DAY (20 DEG. C) 11/30/2004 0 7 0 0 CO0001333 USDOE-ROCKY FLATS FIELD OFFICE JEFFERSON PHOSPHORUS, TOTAL (AS P) 12/31/2003 0 0 0 67 CO0001511 LOCKHEED MARTIN SPACE SYSTEMS JEFFERSON BRUSH CREEK/FILTER GULCH/S PLATTE R COLIFORM, FECAL GENERAL 12/31/2004 0 0 * * CO0020206 CLEAR CREEK VALLEY SAN DIST JEFFERSON CLEAR CREEK MANGANESE, DISSOLVED (AS MN) 9/30/2003 0 0 44 0 CO0020206 CLEAR CREEK VALLEY SAN DIST JEFFERSON CLEAR CREEK MANGANESE, DISSOLVED (AS MN) 2/29/2004 0 0 50 0 CO0020206 CLEAR CREEK VALLEY SAN DIST JEFFERSON CLEAR CREEK MANGANESE, DISSOLVED (AS MN) 3/31/2004 0 0 28 0 CO0020206 CLEAR CREEK VALLEY SAN DIST JEFFERSON CLEAR CREEK MANGANESE, DISSOLVED (AS MN) 4/30/2004 0 0 1 0 CO0020206 CLEAR CREEK VALLEY SAN DIST JEFFERSON CLEAR CREEK MANGANESE, DISSOLVED (AS MN) 9/30/2004 0 0 34 0 CO0020435 TRI-LAKES WASTEWATER TRMT FAC. EL PASO MONUMENT CREEK COPPER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 1/31/2004 0 0 27 2 CO0020435 TRI-LAKES WASTEWATER TRMT FAC. EL PASO MONUMENT CREEK COPPER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 2/29/2004 0 0 25 14 CO0020435 TRI-LAKES WASTEWATER TRMT FAC. EL PASO MONUMENT CREEK COPPER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 3/31/2004 0 0 29 19 CO0020451 FRISCO SANITATION DISTRICT SUMMIT MINERS CRK/WETLANDS/DILLON RESERVR COLIFORM, FECAL GENERAL 9/30/2003 0 0 0 8 CO0020508 EVANS, CITY OF WELD SOUTH PLATTE RIVER SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 3/31/2004 0 0 23 25 CO0020516 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CITY OF GARFIELD ROARING FORK RIVER COLIFORM, FECAL GENERAL 8/31/2003 0 0 0 75 CO0020737 SOUTH FORT COLLINS SAN DIST LARIMER FOSSIL CREEK RESERVOIR BOD, 5-DAY (20 DEG. C) 11/30/2003 0 0 9 44 CO0020737 SOUTH FORT COLLINS SAN DIST LARIMER FOSSIL CREEK RESERVOIR SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 11/30/2003 0 0 125 209

32 Quantity Report Average Quantity Max Concentration Concentration Facility County Period End Percent Percent Average Percent Maximum Number Facility Name Name Receiving Water Parameter Description Date Violation Violation Violation Percent Violation CO0020737 SOUTH FORT COLLINS SAN DIST LARIMER FOSSIL CREEK RESERVOIR SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 12/31/2003 0 0 0 7 CO0020737 SOUTH FORT COLLINS SAN DIST LARIMER FOSSIL CREEK RESERVOIR SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 9/30/2004 0 0 0 102 CO0020737 SOUTH FORT COLLINS SAN DIST LARIMER FOSSIL CREEK RESERVOIR SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 10/31/2004 0 0 0 8 CO0020974 USAF-AIR FORCE ACADEMY EL PASO NITROGEN,INORGANIC TOTAL 2/29/2004 0 0 0 1 CO0020974 USAF-AIR FORCE ACADEMY EL PASO SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 12/31/2004 0 0 1685 1190 CO0021067 WIDEFIELD WATER & SAN. DIST. EL PASO FOUNTAIN CREEK BOD, 5-DAY (20 DEG. C) 4/30/2004 0 0 0 32 CO0021067 WIDEFIELD WATER & SAN. DIST. EL PASO FOUNTAIN CREEK BOD, 5-DAY (20 DEG. C) 5/31/2004 0 0 0 6 CO0021067 WIDEFIELD WATER & SAN. DIST. EL PASO FOUNTAIN CREEK NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 2/29/2004 0 0 29 0 CO0021067 WIDEFIELD WATER & SAN. DIST. EL PASO FOUNTAIN CREEK NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 10/31/2004 0 0 0 76 CO0021067 WIDEFIELD WATER & SAN. DIST. EL PASO FOUNTAIN CREEK SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 4/30/2004 0 0 41 131 CO0021067 WIDEFIELD WATER & SAN. DIST. EL PASO FOUNTAIN CREEK SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 5/31/2004 0 0 2 6 CO0021369 EAGLE RIVER WATER & SAN. DIST. EAGLE GORE CREEK COPPER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 9/30/2004 0 0 0 9 CO0021440 FORT LUPTON, CITY OF WELD SOUTH PLATTE RIVER COPPER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 7/31/2003 0 0 41 0 CO0021547 BRIGHTON, CITY OF ADAMS SOUTH PLATTE RIVER CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL 10/31/2004 0 0 0 247 CO0021580 WELD COUNTY TRI-AREA SAN DIST WELD UNNAMED DITCH TO ST. VRAIN CREEK BOD, 5-DAY (20 DEG. C) 3/31/2004 0 0 13 0 CO0021580 WELD COUNTY TRI-AREA SAN DIST WELD UNNAMED DITCH TO ST. VRAIN CREEK BOD, 5-DAY (20 DEG. C) 4/30/2004 0 0 60 38 CO0021580 WELD COUNTY TRI-AREA SAN DIST WELD UNNAMED DITCH TO ST. VRAIN CREEK SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 7/31/2004 0 0 0 17 CO0021717 USBOR-LEADVILLE DRAIN TUNN (E) LAKE OIL & GREASE 11/30/2004 0 0 0 25 CO0023124 LAFAYETTE, CITY OF BOULDER COAL CREEK SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 1/31/2004 0 0 0 24 CO0023132 MONTE VISTA, CITY OF RIO GRANDE TRIB TO RIO GRANDE RIVER PH 4/30/2004 0 0 0 4 CO0023949 BLACK HAWK/CENTRAL CITY S.D. GILPIN NORTH CLEAR CREEK CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL 4/30/2004 0 0 76 2085 CO0024082 DURANGO, CITY OF LA PLATA ANIMAS RIVER SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 6/30/2004 0 0 0 3 CO0024171 WESTMINSTER, CITY OF ADAMS FARMERS HIGH LINE CANAL/BIG DRY CRK COPPER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 1/31/2004 0 0 8 0 CO0024392 SECURITY SANITATION DISTRICT EL PASO FOUNTAIN CREEK CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL 9/30/2003 0 0 122 281 CO0024457 CHEROKEE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT EL PASO EAST FORK OF SAND CREEK BOD, CARBONACEOUS 05 DAY, 20C 1/31/2004 0 0 8 0 CO0026387 ASPEN CONSOLIDATED SAN DISTRCT PITKIN ROARING FORK CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL 10/31/2003 0 0 0 750 CO0026387 ASPEN CONSOLIDATED SAN DISTRCT PITKIN ROARING FORK CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL 4/30/2004 0 0 0 10 CO0026387 ASPEN CONSOLIDATED SAN DISTRCT PITKIN ROARING FORK NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 3/31/2004 0 0 69 0 CO0026409 BROOMFIELD, CITY OF ADAMS BIG DRY CRK;GREAT WSTRN RES SELENIUM, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 9/30/2004 0 0 15 0 CO0026409 BROOMFIELD, CITY OF ADAMS BIG DRY CRK;GREAT WSTRN RES SELENIUM, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 10/31/2004 0 0 23 0 CO0026409 BROOMFIELD, CITY OF ADAMS BIG DRY CRK;GREAT WSTRN RES SELENIUM, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 10/31/2004 0 0 22 0

33 Quantity Report Average Quantity Max Concentration Concentration Facility County Period End Percent Percent Average Percent Maximum Number Facility Name Name Receiving Water Parameter Description Date Violation Violation Violation Percent Violation CO0026409 BROOMFIELD, CITY OF ADAMS BIG DRY CRK;GREAT WSTRN RES SELENIUM, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 11/30/2004 0 0 9 0 CO0026409 BROOMFIELD, CITY OF ADAMS BIG DRY CRK;GREAT WSTRN RES SELENIUM, TOTAL RECOVERABLE 7/31/2004 0 0 161 12 CO0026409 BROOMFIELD, CITY OF ADAMS BIG DRY CRK;GREAT WSTRN RES SELENIUM, TOTAL RECOVERABLE 8/31/2004 0 0 17 0 CO0026662 SOUTH ADAMS COUNTY W&S DIST ADAMS SOUTH PLATTE RIVER CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL 3/31/2004 0 0 0 56 CO0026671 LONGMONT, CITY OF BOULDER ST. VRAIN CREEK BOD, 5-DAY (20 DEG. C) 2/29/2004 0 0 10 9 CO0026671 LONGMONT, CITY OF BOULDER ST. VRAIN CREEK COLIFORM, FECAL GENERAL 9/30/2003 0 0 0 485 CO0026671 LONGMONT, CITY OF BOULDER ST. VRAIN CREEK NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 7/31/2003 0 0 14 0 CO0026671 LONGMONT, CITY OF BOULDER ST. VRAIN CREEK NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 6/30/2004 0 0 2 0 CO0026671 LONGMONT, CITY OF BOULDER ST. VRAIN CREEK NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 7/31/2004 0 0 70 0 CO0026671 LONGMONT, CITY OF BOULDER ST. VRAIN CREEK NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 8/31/2004 0 0 18 0 CO0026735 COLORADO SPRINGS, CITY OF EL PASO FOUNTAIN CR, MONUMENT CR CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL 3/31/2004 0 0 0 1614 CO0026735 COLORADO SPRINGS, CITY OF EL PASO FOUNTAIN CR, MONUMENT CR CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL 6/30/2004 0 0 0 900 CO0027154 TWENTYMILE COAL COMPANY ROUTT FOIDEL/FISH/MIDDLE CRKS TO TROUT CR SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 1/31/2004 0 0 1786 843 CO0027154 TWENTYMILE COAL COMPANY ROUTT FOIDEL/FISH/MIDDLE CRKS TO TROUT CR SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 9/30/2004 0 0 11 0 CO0027529 GOLD KING MINES CORPORATION SAN JUAN CEMENT CREEK ZINC, TOTAL (AS ZN) 1/31/2004 0 0 477 447 CO0027529 GOLD KING MINES CORPORATION SAN JUAN CEMENT CREEK ZINC, TOTAL (AS ZN) 2/29/2004 0 0 57 19 CO0027529 GOLD KING MINES CORPORATION SAN JUAN CEMENT CREEK ZINC, TOTAL (AS ZN) 3/31/2004 0 0 3 8 CO0027707 SWIFT BEEF COMPANY WELD LONE TREE CREEK FLOW, IN CONDUIT OR THRU TREATMENT PLT 9/30/2004 1 0 0 0 CO0031755 PAGOSA AREA WATER & SAN. DIST. ARCHULETA STEVENS DRAW FLOW, IN CONDUIT OR THRU TREATMENT PLT 3/31/2004 2 0 0 0 CO0031844 UPPER THOMPSON SANITATION DIST LARIMER BIG THOMPSON RIVER COPPER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 7/31/2003 0 0 21 0 CO0031844 UPPER THOMPSON SANITATION DIST LARIMER BIG THOMPSON RIVER COPPER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 8/31/2003 0 0 9 0 CO0031844 UPPER THOMPSON SANITATION DIST LARIMER BIG THOMPSON RIVER COPPER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 8/31/2003 0 0 51 0 CO0031844 UPPER THOMPSON SANITATION DIST LARIMER BIG THOMPSON RIVER COPPER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 6/30/2004 0 0 2 0 CO0031844 UPPER THOMPSON SANITATION DIST LARIMER BIG THOMPSON RIVER COPPER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 8/31/2004 0 0 13 0 CO0036757 NORTHGLENN, CITY OF WELD BULL CNL/BIG DRY CRK/THOMPSON DITCH SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 8/31/2004 0 0 0 11 CO0037681 THREE LAKES WATER & SAN DIST GRAND WILLOW CREEK BOD, 5-DAY (20 DEG. C) 8/31/2003 0 0 50 170 CO0037681 THREE LAKES WATER & SAN DIST GRAND WILLOW CREEK NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 7/31/2003 0 0 311 0 CO0037681 THREE LAKES WATER & SAN DIST GRAND WILLOW CREEK SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 7/31/2003 0 0 23 0 CO0037681 THREE LAKES WATER & SAN DIST GRAND WILLOW CREEK SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 8/31/2003 0 0 47 152 CO0038334 LONDON MINE LLC PARK SOUTH MOSQUITO CREEK %EFFECT STATRE 48HR ACU CERIODAPHNIA 6/30/2004 0 0 0 100 CO0038334 LONDON MINE LLC PARK SOUTH MOSQUITO CREEK %EFFECT STATRE 48HR ACU CERIODAPHNIA 9/30/2004 0 0 0 7

34 Quantity Report Average Quantity Max Concentration Concentration Facility County Period End Percent Percent Average Percent Maximum Number Facility Name Name Receiving Water Parameter Description Date Violation Violation Violation Percent Violation CO0038334 LONDON MINE LLC PARK SOUTH MOSQUITO CREEK %EFFECT STATRE 48HR ACU CERIODAPHNIA 12/31/2004 0 0 0 * CO0038334 LONDON MINE LLC PARK SOUTH MOSQUITO CREEK %EFFECT STATRE 96HR ACU PIMEPHALES 9/30/2003 0 0 0 * CO0038334 LONDON MINE LLC PARK SOUTH MOSQUITO CREEK %EFFECT STATRE 96HR ACU PIMEPHALES 12/31/2003 0 0 0 * CO0038334 LONDON MINE LLC PARK SOUTH MOSQUITO CREEK %EFFECT STATRE 96HR ACU PIMEPHALES 3/31/2004 0 0 0 * CO0038334 LONDON MINE LLC PARK SOUTH MOSQUITO CREEK %EFFECT STATRE 96HR ACU PIMEPHALES 6/30/2004 0 0 0 100 CO0038334 LONDON MINE LLC PARK SOUTH MOSQUITO CREEK %EFFECT STATRE 96HR ACU PIMEPHALES 9/30/2004 0 0 0 * CO0038334 LONDON MINE LLC PARK SOUTH MOSQUITO CREEK %EFFECT STATRE 96HR ACU PIMEPHALES 12/31/2004 0 0 0 * CO0038334 LONDON MINE LLC PARK SOUTH MOSQUITO CREEK MERCURY, TOTAL (AS HG) 3/31/2004 0 0 20 10 CO0038334 LONDON MINE LLC PARK SOUTH MOSQUITO CREEK ZINC, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 8/31/2004 0 0 3 0 CO0038547 PLUM CREEK WASTEWATER AUTH DOUGLAS EAST PLUM CREEK COPPER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 2/29/2004 0 0 25 0 CO0038547 PLUM CREEK WASTEWATER AUTH DOUGLAS EAST PLUM CREEK PHOSPHORUS, TOTAL (AS P) 6/30/2004 0 0 8 0 CO0038547 PLUM CREEK WASTEWATER AUTH DOUGLAS EAST PLUM CREEK PHOSPHORUS, TOTAL (AS P) 7/31/2004 0 0 22 0 CO0038547 PLUM CREEK WASTEWATER AUTH DOUGLAS EAST PLUM CREEK PHOSPHORUS, TOTAL (AS P) 8/31/2004 0 0 25 0 CO0038547 PLUM CREEK WASTEWATER AUTH DOUGLAS EAST PLUM CREEK PHOSPHORUS, TOTAL (AS P) 8/31/2004 0 0 156 0 CO0038547 PLUM CREEK WASTEWATER AUTH DOUGLAS EAST PLUM CREEK PHOSPHORUS, TOTAL (AS P) 11/30/2004 1 0 0 0 CO0038547 PLUM CREEK WASTEWATER AUTH DOUGLAS EAST PLUM CREEK PHOSPHORUS, TOTAL (AS P) 12/31/2004 7 0 0 0 CO0038954 PLATORO MINING CO&UNION GOLD CONEJOS CONEJOS RIVER ARSENIC, TOTAL (AS AS) 7/31/2004 0 0 0 84 CO0038954 PLATORO MINING CO&UNION GOLD CONEJOS CONEJOS RIVER ARSENIC, TOTAL (AS AS) 10/31/2004 0 0 0 10 CO0038954 PLATORO MINING CO&UNION GOLD CONEJOS CONEJOS RIVER LEAD, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 7/31/2004 0 0 9 0 CO0038954 PLATORO MINING CO&UNION GOLD CONEJOS CONEJOS RIVER SILVER, POTENTIALLY DISSOLVED 4/30/2004 0 0 3233 21 CO0038954 PLATORO MINING CO&UNION GOLD CONEJOS CONEJOS RIVER SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 7/31/2003 0 0 140 60 CO0040037 CRAIG, CITY OF MOFFAT YAMPA RIVER NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 9/30/2003 0 0 12 0 CO0040142 FRASER SANITATION DISTRICT GRAND FRASER RIVER FLOW, IN CONDUIT OR THRU TREATMENT PLT 3/31/2004 11 0 0 0 CO0040291 STONEGATE VILLAGE METRO DIST DOUGLAS CHERRY CREEK FLOW, IN CONDUIT OR THRU TREATMENT PLT 7/31/2003 168 0 0 0 CO0040291 STONEGATE VILLAGE METRO DIST DOUGLAS CHERRY CREEK NITROGEN, NITRATE TOTAL (AS N) 3/31/2004 0 0 0 15 CO0040291 STONEGATE VILLAGE METRO DIST DOUGLAS CHERRY CREEK NITROGEN, NITRATE TOTAL (AS N) 5/31/2004 0 0 0 20 CO0040681 ARAPAHOE COUNTY W&WW AUTH ARAPAHOE GROUNDWATER & LONE TREE CREEK FLOW, IN CONDUIT OR THRU TREATMENT PLT 12/31/2003 1 0 0 0 CO0040681 ARAPAHOE COUNTY W&WW AUTH ARAPAHOE GROUNDWATER & LONE TREE CREEK FLOW, IN CONDUIT OR THRU TREATMENT PLT 1/31/2004 1 0 0 0 CO0040681 ARAPAHOE COUNTY W&WW AUTH ARAPAHOE GROUNDWATER & LONE TREE CREEK FLOW, IN CONDUIT OR THRU TREATMENT PLT 2/29/2004 3 0 0 0 CO0040681 ARAPAHOE COUNTY W&WW AUTH ARAPAHOE GROUNDWATER & LONE TREE CREEK FLOW, IN CONDUIT OR THRU TREATMENT PLT 4/30/2004 4 0 0 0 CO0040681 ARAPAHOE COUNTY W&WW AUTH ARAPAHOE GROUNDWATER & LONE TREE CREEK FLOW, IN CONDUIT OR THRU TREATMENT PLT 10/31/2004 17 0 0 0

35 Quantity Report Average Quantity Max Concentration Concentration Facility County Period End Percent Percent Average Percent Maximum Number Facility Name Name Receiving Water Parameter Description Date Violation Violation Violation Percent Violation CO0040681 ARAPAHOE COUNTY W&WW AUTH ARAPAHOE GROUNDWATER & LONE TREE CREEK FLOW, IN CONDUIT OR THRU TREATMENT PLT 11/30/2004 9 0 0 0 CO0040681 ARAPAHOE COUNTY W&WW AUTH ARAPAHOE GROUNDWATER & LONE TREE CREEK FLOW, IN CONDUIT OR THRU TREATMENT PLT 12/31/2004 16 0 0 0 CO0040797 PARKER WATER AND SAN DIST DOUGLAS GROUNDWATER TO SULPHUR GULCH COLIFORM, TOTAL GENERAL 8/31/2003 0 0 235 9320 CO0040797 PARKER WATER AND SAN DIST DOUGLAS GROUNDWATER TO SULPHUR GULCH COLIFORM, TOTAL GENERAL 9/30/2003 0 0 22 0 CO0040797 PARKER WATER AND SAN DIST DOUGLAS GROUNDWATER TO SULPHUR GULCH COLIFORM, TOTAL GENERAL 12/31/2003 0 0 96 484 CO0042064 CLEAN HARBORS DEER TRAIL, LLC ADAMS BEAVER CREEK ARSENIC, TOTAL (AS AS) 12/31/2003 0 0 110 0 CO0042480 VIACOM INTERNATIONAL, INC. EAGLE EAGLE RIVER ZINC, TOTAL (AS ZN) 10/31/2003 0 0 0 41 CO0043010 SUPERIOR METROPOLITAN DIST NO1 BOULDER 001 ROCK CREEK/002 EFF REUSE SITES COLIFORM, TOTAL GENERAL 3/31/2004 0 0 45 13378 CO0043010 SUPERIOR METROPOLITAN DIST NO1 BOULDER 001 ROCK CREEK/002 EFF REUSE SITES COLIFORM, TOTAL GENERAL 4/30/2004 0 0 855 270 CO0043010 SUPERIOR METROPOLITAN DIST NO1 BOULDER 001 ROCK CREEK/002 EFF REUSE SITES COLIFORM, TOTAL GENERAL 8/31/2004 0 0 1555 987 CO0043010 SUPERIOR METROPOLITAN DIST NO1 BOULDER 001 ROCK CREEK/002 EFF REUSE SITES COLIFORM, TOTAL GENERAL 9/30/2004 0 0 491 226 CO0046507 PARKER WATER & SANITATION DIST DOUGLAS SULPHUR GULCH/LAND APP CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL 3/31/2004 0 0 0 1584 CO0046507 PARKER WATER & SANITATION DIST DOUGLAS SULPHUR GULCH/LAND APP CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL 8/31/2004 0 0 0 1953

* Signifies an apparent exceedance of undetermined magnitude.

End Notes

1 JM Kovalic, The Clean Water Act of 1987, 2nd edition, (Alexandria, VA: Water Environment Federation, 1987). 2 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Inspector General, Water Enforcement: State Enforcement of Clean Water Act Dischargers Can Be More Effective, August 2001. 3 U.S. EPA, Office of Water, National Water Quality Inventory: 2000 Report to Congress, EPA-841-R-02-001, August 2002, available at http://www.epa.gov/305b/2000report/. 4 Government Accountability Office (GAO), Water Quality: Inconsistent State Approaches Complicate Nation’s Efforts to Identify Its Most Polluted Waters, GAO-02-186, January 2002. 5 U.S. Geological Survey, The Quality of Our Nation’s Waters--Pesticides in the Nation’s Streams and Ground Water, 1992-2001, U.S.G.S. Circular 1291, March 2006. 6 Natural Resources Defense Council. Testing the Waters 2005: A Guide to Water Quality at Vacation Beaches, August 2005, available at http://www.nrdc.org/water/oceans/ttw/titinx.asp. 7 U.S. EPA, 2004 National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories, available at http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/fish/advisories/fs2004.pdf. 8 U.S. EPA, 2003 Toxics Release Inventory, available at http://www.epa.gov/tri. 9 U.S. EPA, Report to Congress: Impacts and Controls of CSOs and SSOs, EPA 833-R-04-001, August 2004. 10 U.S. EPA. The Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure Gap Analysis. EPA-816-R-02-020. September 2002. 11 U.S. EPA, NPDES Permit Program Basics, “Water Permitting 101,” fact sheet, accessed March 13, 2006 at http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/101pape.pdf. 12 U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA NPDES Permit Writers’ Manual, EPA-833-B-96-003, December 1996. 13 U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA NPDES Permit Writers’ Manual, EPA-833-B-96-003, December 1996. 14 U.S. EPA, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, State Program Status, accessed at http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/statestats.cfm on March 3, 2006. 15 Code of Federal Regulations, TITLE 33 > CHAPTER 26 > SUBCHAPTER I > Section 401(d). 16 U.S. EPA Office of Inspector General, EPA Should Take Further Steps to Address Funding Shortfalls and Time Slippages in Permit Compliance System Modernization Effort, 2003-M-00014, May 20, 2003. 17 U.S. EPA Office of Inspector General, EPA Should Take Further Steps to Address Funding Shortfalls and Time Slippages in Permit Compliance System Modernization Effort, 2003-M-00014, May 20, 2003. 18 Government Accountability Office (GAO), Clean Water Act: Improved Resource Planning Would Help EPA Better Respond to Changing Needs and Fiscal Constraints, GAO-05-721, July 2005. 19 U.S. EPA Inspector General, Water Enforcement: State Enforcement of Clean Water Act Dischargers Can Be More Effective, August 2001. 20 Judy Meyer et al, Where Rivers Are Born: The Scientific Imperative for Defending Small Streams and Wetlands, September 2003. 21 Judy Meyer et al, Where Rivers Are Born: The Scientific Imperative for Defending Small Streams and Wetlands, September 2003. 22 John Heilprin, “Administration Outlines New Approach for Regulating Wetlands, Other Water Bodies,” Associated Press, January 11, 2003. 23 68 FR 1991-1998, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Environmental Protection Agency, “Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the Clean Water Act Regulatory Definition of ‘Waters of the United States,” January 15, 2003. 24 See for example, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,Galveston District Non Jurisdictional Determinations Report Per SWANCC, available at http://www.swg.usace.army.mil/reg/Reports/NJD%20quarterly/non_jd_reports.asp. 25 Letter to EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt from Rep. Frank Pallone (NJ) and Clay Shaw (FL), dated December 4, 2003. 26 Katonak and Rose, Michigan State University, Public Health Risks Associated with Wastewater Blending, November 17, 2003. 27 Katonak and Rose, Michigan State University, Public Health Risks Associated with Wastewater Blending, November 17, 2003. 28 U.S. EPA, “Proposed Rule to Protect Communities from Overflowing Sewers,” Fact Sheet, January 2001, available at http://www.epa.gov/npdes/regulations/facsheet.pdf. 29 U.S. EPA, “Proposed Rule to Protect Communities from Overflowing Sewers,” Fact Sheet, January 2001, available at http://www.epa.gov/npdes/regulations/facsheet.pdf. 30 Seth Borenstein, “Fewer polluters punished under Bush administration, records show,” Knight Ridder Newspapers, December 9, 2003.

31 Seth Borenstein, “Fewer polluters punished under Bush administration, records show,” Knight Ridder Newspapers, December 9, 2003. 32 U.S. EPA, The Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure Gap Analysis, EPA-816-R-02-020, September 2002. 33 71 FR 894-901, Environmental Protection Agency, “Amendments to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Regulations for Storm Water Discharges Associated With Oil and Gas Exploration, Production, Processing, or Treatment Operations, or Transmission Facilities,” January 6, 2006. 34 70 FR 5093-5100, Environmental Protection Agency, “Application of Pesticides to Waters of the United States in Compliance With FIFRA,” February 1, 2005. 35 69 FR 1035-1048, Department of the Interior, “Surface Coal Mining and Reclamation Operations; Excess Spoil; Stream Buffer Zones; Diversions; Proposed Rule,” January 7, 2004. 36 67 FR 31129-31143, U.S. EPA and Army Corps of Engineers, “Final Revisions to the Clean Water Act Regulatory Definitions of ‘Fill Material’ and ‘Discharge of Fill Material’,” May 9, 2002. 37 67 FR 2019-2095, Army Corps of Engineers, “Issuance of Nationwide Permits; Notice,” January 15, 2002. 38 U.S. EPA, National Water Quality Inventory: 1998 Report to Congress, June 2000. 39 70 FR 57822, U.S. EPA, “TRI Burden Reduction Proposed Rule,” October 4, 2005. 40 The 2003 reported data has been adjusted for production. Toxics Use Reduction Institute, “Results to Date”, accessed March 9, 2006 at http://www.turadata.turi.org/Success/ResultsToDate.html.